On 4/4/2011 at 09:32 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 01:47:34PM +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > > On 2011-03-23T11:50:02, Lars Ellenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > # Take advantage of /etc/mtab if present, use portable mount command > > > > # otherwise. Normalize format to "dev mountpoint fstype". > > > > I wonder if we shouldn't just always rely on "mount" and insist on that > > providing proper data. > > > > Re-implementing mount seems like a bad idea. > > It does to me too. Do you know why isn't it used? And is > there any difference between /proc/mounts and the mount output > (apart from the format)?
mount reads /etc/mtab, then falls back to /proc/mounts if the former doesn't exist. I'm not sure if it does anything beyond that (I have some very faint recollection of seeing "mount" block if there was a hung NFS mount or something lying around - OTOH, my very faint recollection might have been of "df", which is obviously completely different, so maybe I should just shut up now). Regards, Tim -- Tim Serong <[email protected]> Senior Clustering Engineer, OPS Engineering, Novell Inc. _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
