> > > Could also please explain why you want to go via user
> > > mounts. Other OS use a daemon for that, which e.g. can maintain
> > > access controls. How do you want to manage this?
> >
> > The unprivileged mounts patches do contain a simple form of access
> > control. I don't think anything
Hi,
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > How does this deal with certain special cases:
> > - chroot: how will mount/df only show the for chroot relevant mounts?
>
> That is a very good question. Andreas Gruenbacher had some patches
> for fixing behavior of /proc/mounts under a
Could also please explain why you want to go via user
mounts. Other OS use a daemon for that, which e.g. can maintain
access controls. How do you want to manage this?
The unprivileged mounts patches do contain a simple form of access
control. I don't think anything more is needed,
> > > - loop: how is the connection between file and loop device maintained?
> >
> > We also discussed this with Karel, maybe it didn't make it onto lkml.
> >
> > The proposed solution was to store the "loop" flag separately in a
> > file under /var. It could just be an empty file for each such
- loop: how is the connection between file and loop device maintained?
We also discussed this with Karel, maybe it didn't make it onto lkml.
The proposed solution was to store the loop flag separately in a
file under /var. It could just be an empty file for each such loop
device:
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 10:09:03AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > - loop: how is the connection between file and loop device maintained?
>
> We also discussed this with Karel, maybe it didn't make it onto lkml.
>
> The proposed solution was to store the "loop" flag separately in a
> file under
> > Q: Why do we need correct option showing in /proc/mounts?
> > A: We want /proc/mounts to fully replace /etc/mtab. The reasons for
> >this are:
> > - unprivileged mounters won't be able to update /etc/mtab
> > - /etc/mtab doesn't work with private mount namespaces
> > -
Q: Why do we need correct option showing in /proc/mounts?
A: We want /proc/mounts to fully replace /etc/mtab. The reasons for
this are:
- unprivileged mounters won't be able to update /etc/mtab
- /etc/mtab doesn't work with private mount namespaces
- /etc/mtab can
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 10:09:03AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
- loop: how is the connection between file and loop device maintained?
We also discussed this with Karel, maybe it didn't make it onto lkml.
The proposed solution was to store the loop flag separately in a
file under /var.
Hi,
On Thursday 24. January 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> Q: Why do we need correct option showing in /proc/mounts?
> A: We want /proc/mounts to fully replace /etc/mtab. The reasons for
>this are:
> - unprivileged mounters won't be able to update /etc/mtab
> - /etc/mtab doesn't work
Hi,
On Thursday 24. January 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
Q: Why do we need correct option showing in /proc/mounts?
A: We want /proc/mounts to fully replace /etc/mtab. The reasons for
this are:
- unprivileged mounters won't be able to update /etc/mtab
- /etc/mtab doesn't work with
> Where did you check for the existence of a ->show_options method for
> unionfs? Unionfs does implement ->show_options and supports all of the
> mount/remount options. See:
>
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Miklos Szeredi writes:
> > From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > This series addresses the problem of showing mount options in
> > /proc/mounts.
[...]
> > The following filesystems still need fixing: CIFS, NFS, XFS, Unionfs,
> > Reiser4. For CIFS,
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Miklos Szeredi writes:
From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This series addresses the problem of showing mount options in
/proc/mounts.
[...]
The following filesystems still need fixing: CIFS, NFS, XFS, Unionfs,
Reiser4. For CIFS, NFS and XFS I
Where did you check for the existence of a -show_options method for
unionfs? Unionfs does implement -show_options and supports all of the
mount/remount options. See:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Miklos Szeredi writes:
> From: Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> This series addresses the problem of showing mount options in
> /proc/mounts.
>
> Several filesystems which use mount options, have not implemented a
> .show_options superblock operation.
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Miklos Szeredi writes:
From: Miklos Szeredi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This series addresses the problem of showing mount options in
/proc/mounts.
Several filesystems which use mount options, have not implemented a
.show_options superblock operation. Several others
17 matches
Mail list logo
