On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 04:23:20PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 16:04 +0200, Petr Uzel wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I hacked the following patch with which it is possible to use > > "umount $dir" instead of "fusermount -u $dir", which IMHO is an > > improvement in usability. It seems to work (at least for me), however, > > I have to admit that I don't like it very much, because: > > - it complicates umount > > - duplicates code from fusermount > > And this is not the only one that would have to be duplicated. The > mount and umount races that were fixed in fusermount in recently and not > so recently would also have to be added to util-linux, which would > actually be a good thing, since in theory they could affect fstab based > user mounts as well (though that is much more unlikely than with fuse, > where the user chooses the mountpoint). Do you mean this commit: 8b3a0c74a15e237eb4b7053774600f0ce3fff403 Fix race if two "fusermount -u" instances are run in parallel. ? > > - should (???) be implemented using umount helpers > > The end goal is to implement permission checking for unprivileged mount > and umount in the kernel. OK, that sounds reasonable. Not something I'd have guts to look into, though :) Petr -- Petr Uzel IRC: ptr_uzl @ freenode
Attachment:
pgpnu39Yvg2HE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
