James Carlson wrote:
> John Plocher writes:
>> James Carlson wrote:
>>> How's that?
>> The difference I see is that in the original case, only autofs
>> triggered mount points were handled by this code path; in the
>> new code allows anything that sets S_TRIGGER will, uhm, trigger
>> this code path.
>>
>> As long as only autofs does it, things are identical. If anything
>> else does...
>>
>> At least, that's how I parsed it.
>
> That's what appears to me to make it identical.
>
> If the project team is actually making _more_ file systems set
> S_TRIGGER, then I agree that the bug has been crowbared open a bit,
> and that might well be enough to push me into the "opposed" camp.
>
The team just met with Don Cragun to discuss the concerns. We've all
agreed on how to proceed. Notes coming out shortly and I'll summarize
on the alias.
Rich
