Re: [STATUS 2.5] January 18, 2002

From: Pavel Machek (pavel@suse.cz)
Date: Wed Jan 23 2002 - 06:31:22 EST

Hi!

> > > All this seems very neat. One question: what about forced umount / forced
> > > remount readonly stuff? Any plans on that?
> > >
> >
> > That would be *very* nice indeed. Even if it was only for things like NFS
> > and SMBFS.
>
> umount(mountpoint, MNT_DETACH);
>
> Had been there for quite a while...
>
> It's not a forced umount - it detaches the subtree from mountpoint and
> filesystem(s) go away when they stop being busy. But for remote
> filesystems that's precisely what you want.

Can I umount filesystems below them? Can I reboot with
busy-but-detached filesystems? Can I kill the processes accessing busy
filesystems? [That was big point of force umount, I believe.]
                                                                        Pavel 

-- 
(about SSSCA) "I don't say this lightly.  However, I really think that the U.S.
no longer is classifiable as a democracy, but rather as a plutocracy." --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/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 23 2002 - 21:01:08 EST