Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 5 Jan 2005 03:12:50 +0100 (CET) | From | Bodo Eggert <> | Subject | Re: the umount() saga for regular linux desktop users |
| |
(Aplologies for the indirect reply, I didn't see the cited message yet)
> On Sun, 2005-01-02 at 17:43 -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > > On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:38:29 +0100, Bodo Eggert said: > > > > > Maybe it's possible to extend the semantics of umount -l to change all > > > cwds under that mountpoint to be deleted directories which will no > > > longer cause the mountpoint to be busy (e.g. by redirecting them to a > > > special inode on initramfs). Most applications can cope with that (if > > > not, they're buggy), > > > > You mean that a program is *buggy* if it does: > > > > cwd("/home/user"); > > /* do some stuff while we get our cwd ripped out from under us */ > > file = open("./.mycconfrc"); > > > > and expects the file to be opened in /home/user???
If the user was bad, the user directory *will* just vanish ("what was your login, please"), and any other directory may vanish, too:
$ mkdir /tmp/test;cd /tmp/test $ ls -la total 0 drwx------ 2 7eggert users 40 2005-01-05 03:00 . drwx------ 3 7eggert users 60 2005-01-05 03:00 .. $ # /tmp/test gets removed here $ ls -la total 0 $ echo foo>bar -bash: bar: No such file or directory $ - 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/
| |