-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/06/2015 02:56 PM, James Long wrote:
> Phil, it does work if /mnt is already a mount point, and I
> subsequently make a second mount underneath /mnt.
>
> I expect that the patched version of unshare(1) with restore the
> previous behavior, all
Phil, it does work if /mnt is already a mount point, and I subsequently
make a second mount underneath /mnt.
I expect that the patched version of unshare(1) with restore the
previous behavior, allowing things mounted directly on /mnt to be private.
Thanks,
Jim
On 06/06/2015 10:34 AM, James
Responding for others who find this on the web:
On 06/05/2015 10:03 AM, Phil Susi wrote:
On 6/5/2015 11:00 AM, James Long wrote:
So the mount is still visible to other processes, and doesn't exit with
the process, as it used to in wheezy. The same thing happens with
--make-private. What am I do
On 6/5/2015 11:00 AM, James Long wrote:
So the mount is still visible to other processes, and doesn't exit with
the process, as it used to in wheezy. The same thing happens with
--make-private. What am I doing wrong?
I believe you need to --make-private first, *then* mount the fs. The
inherit
On 06/05/2015 08:14 AM, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
Hello James Long.
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 07:13:40AM -0800, James Long wrote:
The man page in jessie for mount(2) states
[...]
Does the man page need to be updated?
This is (again) completely off-topic for util-linux as the system call
and t
Hello James Long.
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 07:13:40AM -0800, James Long wrote:
> The man page in jessie for mount(2) states
[...]
> Does the man page need to be updated?
This is (again) completely off-topic for util-linux as the system call
and the manpage for it is not provided by the util-linux
On 06/05/2015 07:11 AM, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
Hello James Long.
Thanks for the additional feedback you provided.
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 07:00:22AM -0800, James Long wrote:
[...]
Yes, I must be missing something here. I thought that 'mount
--make-rprivate' would restore the previous behavi
Hello James Long.
Thanks for the additional feedback you provided.
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 07:00:22AM -0800, James Long wrote:
[...]
> Yes, I must be missing something here. I thought that 'mount
> --make-rprivate' would restore the previous behavior (man page suggests
> rprivate rather than priv
On 06/05/2015 06:30 AM, Phil Susi wrote:
On 6/5/2015 9:23 AM, James Long wrote:
Hi Andreas,
My problem is actually with unshare(2), rather than unshare(1). Is
there an equivalent patch for unshare(2)?
I don't think you understood the upstream patch. The idea is that after
unshare(2), ca
On 06/05/2015 06:30 AM, Phil Susi wrote:
On 6/5/2015 9:23 AM, James Long wrote:
Hi Andreas,
My problem is actually with unshare(2), rather than unshare(1). Is
there an equivalent patch for unshare(2)?
I don't think you understood the upstream patch. The idea is that after
unshare(2), ca
On 06/05/2015 06:15 AM, Adam Conrad wrote:
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 05:23:35AM -0800, James Long wrote:
Hi Andreas,
My problem is actually with unshare(2), rather than unshare(1).
Is there an equivalent patch for unshare(2)?
That doesn't make much sense. Your bug report was about the com
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 05:23:35AM -0800, James Long wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> My problem is actually with unshare(2), rather than unshare(1).
> Is there an equivalent patch for unshare(2)?
That doesn't make much sense. Your bug report was about the command
line utilite (unshare(1)), while unsh
On 6/5/2015 9:23 AM, James Long wrote:
Hi Andreas,
My problem is actually with unshare(2), rather than unshare(1). Is
there an equivalent patch for unshare(2)?
I don't think you understood the upstream patch. The idea is that after
unshare(2), calls to mount(2) have the option causing t
Hi Andreas,
My problem is actually with unshare(2), rather than unshare(1). Is
there an equivalent patch for unshare(2)?
Thanks,
Jim
On 06/05/2015 12:20 AM, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
Hello James Long.
Thanks for your bug report.
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 11:31:10AM -0800, James Long wro
Hello James Long.
Thanks for your bug report.
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 11:31:10AM -0800, James Long wrote:
> Package: util-linux
> Version: 2.25.2-6
> Severity: important
>
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> 'unshare -m' no longer works, mounts persist and are visible to all:
[...]
Could you please have a
Package: util-linux
Version: 2.25.2-6
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
'unshare -m' no longer works, mounts persist and are visible to all:
# unshare -m /bin/bash
# mount -t nfs -o ro,vers=3,tcp 10.4.5.101:/opt /mnt
# df -Th
>snip<
10.4.5.101:/opt nfs92G 17G 71G 20% /mnt
# e
16 matches
Mail list logo
