On Tuesday 23 August 2011 17:31:20 Kevin Day wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Robert Connolly > > <rob...@linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: > > On Monday 22 August 2011 18:46:54 Kevin Day wrote: > >> I find /etc/mtab to be of poor taste. > >> I have a bunch of patches that fix software to use /proc/mounts and > >> not /etc/mtab. > >> Thus leaving all of the mounted device listing to the kernel (who is > >> always correct). > >> Then there is no need to worry about clobbering /etc/mtab. (especially > >> if your on a read-only or limited-write system). > > > > Can I see your patches for util-linux-ng? Or all the patches? > > > > robert > > I am attaching it, hopefully it does not get blocked. > The following programs need patches to use /proc/mounts > - eject > - glib > - samba (it tries to do writes to /etc/mtab itself!) > - util-linux-ng > - xine-lib > - uClibc (yep, i still use it for better and worse) > - glibc > > Any application that properly uses the libc's _PATH_MOUNTED should not > need to be patched but should obviously need to be > installed/reinstalled after applying the glibc/uclibc patch.
There's a thread from Debian about /etc/mtab: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/06/msg01831.html /proc/mounts doesn't have all the information about loop device mounts, so umounting a loop device wouldn't break down the loop device after. This is a disadvantage. robert
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
