On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 02:55:11PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: >thank you for completly missing the point.
Ok, no need to be rude. I see I went down the wrong track. I'm sorry. > i am not talking about libfdisk, i am talking about busybox. > > its mount -t auto design is fundementally flawed, it gets a complete > list of kernel supported filesystems via sysfs() then it has a static, > hard coded list of `blacklisted' filesystems it shouldn't try, these Blech. The util-linux mount, in contrast, has a hard-coded 'whitelist' of filesystems and inspects the superblock for the appropriate magic for each. If that fails, it calls mount(2) on each non-nodev type appearing in /etc/filesystems (or /proc/filesystems if /etc/filesystems doesn't exist). Hopefully, busybox should be able to do the same without excessive inflation. To be honest, I'm surprised that it doesn't. > in all your partitions being mounted as foofakefs (because nodev > filesystems never fail to mount, even if you hand them a real device, > they just ignore that). I didn't know that about nodev filesystems. I see your point very clearly now. Thank you. > but as i have stated, even if you fix busybox to be smarter you still > have a giant stack of wildcards in all these random filesystems in the > kernel, are they going to behave sanly when told to mount a partition > not containing thier fstype? or will they fuckup and kill the kernel? If busybox pays attention to the superblock magic, the chance of calling mount(2) with the wrong filesystem should be very low. Beyond that, the kernels on offical Debian boot-floppies should also be a known factor. BTW, I tend to agree with David about not changing the dbootstrap code at this stage. I have been adding a 'manual' option to mount_partition -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
