On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 01:54:09AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Thursday 18 June 2009 19:09:26 Colin Watson wrote:
> > When FEATURE_MOUNT_HELPERS is enabled, mount should support the -i
> > option, which prevents calling the helper function. This is used by
> > FUSE: it installs fusermount as a helper, and if it's configured to
> > update /etc/mtab then it does so by calling 'mount -i -f' (i.e. don't
> > call helper, fake the system call, but do update mtab).
> 
> There's something that still uses mtab?  Wow.
> 
> So Ubuntu doesn't support per-process namespaces?

Probably not very well unless you change /etc/mtab to be a symlink, no,
not yet.

> > I believe this is a fairly standard thing for mount helpers to want
> > to do (why should they include code to update mtab when mount can do
> > it for them?)
> 
> Why should they have an /etc/mtab when it should be a symlink to 
> /proc/self/mounts?

I'm not sure why I need to justify this here - you have mtab as a
configuration option in busybox and so surely that configuration should
work. But anyway ...

Historically /etc/mtab couldn't be made a symlink because some
information was missing from /proc/mounts, which was particularly
relevant for the handling of loop devices. It's only relatively recently
(Linux 2.6.26) that /proc/mounts has been useful. I think there may even
still be some problems with this:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=531371 has some more
information.

We probably will move to /etc/mtab as a symlink (cf.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=494001) but we won't do
it just because of a busybox bug. When you have production systems
depending on existing behaviour, a certain amount of caution and trying
to ensure that you've covered all the bases is appropriate.

-- 
Colin Watson                                       [[email protected]]
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox

Reply via email to