lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Should mount --bind not follow symlinks?
Alexander Viro wrote:
> Don't mix symlinks with mounts/bindings. Too much PITA and yes, it had
> been deliberately prohibited. You _really_ don't want to handle the
> broken symlinks and all the realted fun [...]

No. But I hoped _you_ might :-)

> - race-ridden at extreme and useless.
> In automount-like setups you can _replace_ symlinks with bindings.
> No need to mix them.

Hmm. My /etc/auto.opt contains

* :/export/opt/&/LATEST

where all the "LATEST"s etc are symlinks. I found it quite
an elegant way to maintain different versions: the symlink
was de-facto a trivially simple version database.

Does the version state now *have* to be listed in
/etc/auto.opt explicitly? That feels a little retrograde.

Perhaps I'm blissfully unaware of all sorts of vile
race conditions, but why can't the *automounter* chase
the symlinks even if mount shouldn't? Or am I missing
a neater solution?

Rgds

Anthony
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.057 / U:0.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site