Package: mount Version: 2.20.1-5.3 Severity: minor I got unexpected results from the the following command sequence: (/dev/sdb1 is an image of the root filesystem, /dev/sdb4 is an image of /usr)
# mount -t ext2 /dev/sdb1 /mnt -o ro # chroot /mnt # mount -t ext2 /dev/sdb4 /usr -o ro # ls -l /etc/mtab lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Nov 18 2014 /etc/mtab -> /proc/mounts # umount -n /usr warning: failed to read mtab # exit Of note, why *didn't* `mount -t ext2 /dev/sdb4 /usr -o ro` produce an error/warning due to being unable to write to /etc/mtab, and why *did* `umount -n /usr` produce an error about being unable to read /etc/mtab? Strictly, neither of these technically violates what the man pages say, but both violate what is expected. With the `mount` command "-n" was *not* specified so I would expect an error from mount about being unable to write to /etc/mtab. Meanwhile, `umount`'s -n option is a prohibition on /writing/ to /etc/mtab and not /reading/ /etc/mtab. Yet the instruction not to write to /etc/mtab does suggest it shouldn't be read (and may well be unreadable). I'd rate umount's behavior as more troublesome than mount's, but both of these seem incorrect. -- (\___(\___(\______ --=> 8-) EHM <=-- ______/)___/)___/) \BS ( | [email protected] PGP 87145445 | ) / \_CS\ | _____ -O #include <stddisclaimer.h> O- _____ | / _/ 8A19\___\_|_/58D2 7E3D DDF4 7BA6 <-PGP-> 41D1 B375 37D0 8714\_|_/___/5445 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
