On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 11:40:30PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > This is OK with me, *IF AND ONLY IF* we don't want to add to /etc/mtab,
> > > or mess around with the locks mount(8) does... I refuse to code that
> >
> > I don't see why would we want to.
> >
>
> Well, it is necessary that the bindings are listed somewhere.
> Personally, I would prefer a /proc/vfsbind or something like that, and
> be done with it.
Urg, we should mess up /proc even more. It is a process filesystem.
IMHO /proc/<pid>/ns (plan9-like) would be a good (an namespace-aware)
replacement for both /etc/mtab and /proc/mounts.
If someone ist interestead I'll code a simple implemenation (all processes
share the namesspace, execpt the ns-file of chroot()ed processes drops
all mounts and bindings under it's root and shifts the rest up.)
Christoph
-- Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 21:00:26 EST