On 4/30/2012 4:07 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
`umount -l` has its place -- there are cases where you want those semantics. granted, most people actually want a `umount -f`, but the two aren't mutually exclusive. -mike
If you want to prevent processes from opening new files on the mount point, it would be much more sane to mount --move it somewhere hidden. When you detach it entirely from the namespace, you can't even be aware that the mount still exists, let alone change your mind and reattach it. Having a device that is still mounted, but appears not to be to all tools that normally check for such things ( partitioning tools, auto mounters, etc ) is broken.
It is very confusing when you later try to change the cd in the drive and can't mount it because the old one is still mounted, yet lsof, mount, etc offer no evidence that this is the case, and you can't track down the process that is still holding an open fd and kill it.
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
