Alexander Viro writes:
>
>
> On Sat, 10 Jun 2000, Richard Gooch wrote:
>
> > I see your point. However, that suggests that the naming of
> > /proc/mounts is wrong. Perhaps we should have a /proc/namespace that
> > shows all these VFS bindings, and separately a list of real mounts.
>
> What's "real"? /proc/mounts would better left as it was (funny
> replacement for /etc/mtab) and there should be something along the
> lines of /proc/namespace (hell knows, we might make it compatible
> with /proc/ns from new Plan 9). That something most definitely
> doesn't need to share the format with /proc/mounts...
What I mean by "real" mounts is a table that shows how each FS was
brought into the namespace (or each namespace, once you implement
CLONE_NEWNS). So for example:
#device filesystem roots
/dev/hda1 ext2 /
/dev/hda2 ext2 /var/spool/mail /gaol/var/spool/mail
none proc /proc /gaol/proc
in /proc/namespace. And I suppose that /proc/namespace would be unique
for each namespace as well. This way, no distinction is made between
the first mount and subsequent bindings, which is what you'd like, as
I gather you'd like to make all bindings equal.
Aside: I guess the reality is that the first binding (the original
mount -t ext2) is more equal than the subsequent bindings (mount -t
bind). Evidence: the O_CREAT bug I found the other day ;-)
Regards,
Richard....
Permanent: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
