Quoting Ludovic Courtès (2015-07-07 22:29:05) > Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> skribis: > > > Sounds awesome. One thing to be aware of (iirc) is that the > > mount/umount code depends on the fstab parser. I'm not sure whether > > it is needed for the mount/umount(2) interface, or just for the > > command line frontend. I bet the former, that means that you also > > have to move the fstab parser to the libc. > > /etc/fstab handling is not part of the mount/umount functions (on Linux > mount and umount are syscall wrappers generated from syscalls.list.)
That's right, but /bin/umount can be called with both the device path and the mount point. In utils/umount.c this is done by parsing /proc/mounts using the fstab parser. I just checked umount(2) and it says: > The original umount() function was called as umount(device) and > would return ENOTBLK when called with something other than a block > device. In Linux 0.98p4, a call umount(dir) was added, in order to > support anonymous devices. In Linux 2.3.99-pre7, the call > umount(device) was removed, leaving only umount(dir) (since now > devices can be mounted in more than one place, so specifying the > device does not suffice). So indeed, we don't need the fstab parser to emulate current Linux behavior. Justus