Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 8 Feb 2001 00:49:38 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Reasons to honor readonly mount requests |
| |
Hi!
> > I understand that both ext3fs and > > reiserfs will try to fix corrupt filesystems (or at least filesystems > > with unprocessed log entries) in-place even if they're mounted > > read-only. Clearly, virtual replay means more work, but -- just for > > fun -- here are some cases in which it might matter: > > > > 1. You want the disk image untouched for forensic analysis or data > > recovery. > > 2. You don't trust the disk to do writes properly. > > 3. You don't trust the driver to do writes properly. > > 4. You want to test a newer or unstable FS implementation w/ option to > > go back to the older one. > > Excluding the root fs (which probably isn't involved in these sorts of > things anyways), you can always turn off the "RECOVERY" flag on the > filesystem and mount ext3 as ext2, which will not do any recovery.
_If_ you happen to realize that mount -o ro -t ext3 is not really read only. sct know it may write to filesystem, now I know it; but I believe that if you asked Joe Admin
"Linux writes to partition mounted read-only in some cases; is it a bug?"
he would say
"YES!" Pavel
-- I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |