On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 08:13:46PM +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Seblu <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> rc.sysinit | 4 ++-- > >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/rc.sysinit b/rc.sysinit > >> index 733149c..6a01029 100755 > >> --- a/rc.sysinit > >> +++ b/rc.sysinit > >> @@ -29,9 +29,9 @@ if ! /bin/mountpoint -q /dev; then > >> fi > >> /bin/mkdir -p /run/lock /dev/{pts,shm} > >> /bin/chmod 1777 /run/lock > >> -/bin/mountpoint -q /dev/pts || /bin/mount /dev/pts &> /dev/null \ > >> +/bin/mountpoint -q /dev/pts || /bin/mount -n /dev/pts &> /dev/null \ > >> || /bin/mount -n -t devpts devpts /dev/pts -o > >> mode=620,gid=5,nosuid,noexec > >> -/bin/mountpoint -q /dev/shm || /bin/mount /dev/shm &> /dev/null \ > >> +/bin/mountpoint -q /dev/shm || /bin/mount -n /dev/shm &> /dev/null \ > >> || /bin/mount -n -t tmpfs shm /dev/shm -o mode=1777,nosuid,nodev > >> > >> # remount root ro to allow for fsck later on, we remount now to > > Thanks for the patch! > > > Why doing this ? With /etc/mtab linked to /proc/mounts, why just every > > time calling in with -n ? > > We don't yet have the symlink, until we do we should use "-n" here. > > I'm planning to look into the remaining downsides of using libmount > and symlinking mtab to /proc/self/monuts, to see if we can make the > switch. "The others" are doing it, so hopefully we can join soon. If > anyone knows of problems, I'd be interested to know. > > Cheers, > > Tom
We had some fallout when we inititally did this on the launch of 2.19: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/23014 I'm not sure if this was ever reported to upstream or what the current status of this is. d
