Re: Whose bug is this?
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 10:57:43AM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2001, Ethan Benson wrote:
> > so if you had to change anything to accomplish this then mount needs a
> > bug reported against it, i can say that umount -a -r works as
> > documented in potato since my chroot partition always fails to umount
> > since umount -a seems to not bother with the extra /proc mounted under
> > there... i simply get a warning that umount failed, remounting ro and
> > it works, no fsck etc.
> umount only considers what is listed in /etc/mtab, not what is in /proc. You
> may try symlinking the two.
Which has problems of it's own. I quote from the mount manpage:
> If you are not so unwise as to make /etc/mtab a symbolic link to
> /proc/mounts then any loop device allocated by mount will
> be freed by umount. You can also free a loop device by hand, using
> `losetup -d', see losetup(8).
(Shocking double-negative IMHO).
Fortunatly mtab is usually up-to-date so that's not real problem.
Martijn van Oosterhout <email@example.com>
> Magnetism, electricity and motion are like a three-for-two special offer:
> if you have two of them, the third one comes free.