On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:36 PM, Dave Reisner <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 08:32:10PM +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote: >> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Dave Reisner <[email protected]> wrote: >> > 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. >> >> Thanks for the poiner Dave. However, from the comment on that bug it >> seems that we did not actually symlink mtab, just enabled the >> libmonut, and that this might have caused the problem. >> >> I'll be looking into this in the near future with the aim of making >> the switch relatively soon (if there are no known problems or open bug >> reports against the distros who have made the change). >> >> Cheers, >> >> Tom > > It's definitely the cause of the problem. What isn't clear is if > upstream supports /etc/mtab as its own file when mount is linked against > libmount. > > I, personally, have no arguments against modifying the initscripts to > enforce the symlink and coordinate it with a util-linux rebuild, but I'm > not sure others agree. > I switch some times ago with a /etc/mtab linked to /proc/self/mounts and fuse works well.
smbnetfs on /home/seblu/samba type fuse.smbnetfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=18136,group_id=2008) user and group are present. As far i understand bug in #23014, it's due to a too recent util-linux which write permissions of mounts into /proc/self/mount rather than in /etc/mtab. So fuse cannot unmount or see something. About Gerardo's patch, if we fix symlinks from /etc/mtab to /proc/self/mounts, we can always to mount -n, because writing mtab will not be necessary. -- Sébastien Luttringer www.seblu.net
