Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 07 Nov 2001 16:00:36 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Yet another design for /proc. Or actually /kernel. |
| |
Brenneke, Matthew Jeffrey (UMR-Student) wrote:
> >>Actually, /proc/mounts is currently broken, and is an excellent >>example of why the above statement simply isn't true unless you apply >>another level of indirection: try mounting something on a directory >>the name of which contains whitespace in any form (remember, depending >>on your setup this may be doable by an unprivileged user...) >> > >> -hpa >> > > > mbrennek@spaceheater:/home/mbrennek# mkdir stuff\ and > mbrennek@spaceheater:/home/mbrennek# mount -t vfat /dev/hda1 > /home/mbrennek/stuff\ and/ > mbrennek@spaceheater:/home/mbrennek# cat /proc/mounts > /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target1/lun0/part1 / reiserfs rw 0 0 > /dev/hdb2 /home reisferfs rw 0 0 > none /dev/pts devpts rw 0 0 > non /proc proc rw 0 0 > /dev/hda5 /mnt/stuff vfat rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec 0 0 > /dev/hda1 /home/mbrennek/stuff\040and vfat rw 0 0 > mbrennek@spaceheater:/home/mbrennek# > > Are you refering to the 040? >
Right, a good example of "additional encapsulation".
-hpa
- 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/
|  |