On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 08:13:46PM +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Seblu <seblu@seblu.net> wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi <vmlinuz386@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
Signed-off-by: Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi <vmlinuz386@yahoo.com.ar> --- rc.sysinit | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/rc.sysinit b/rc.sysinit index 733149c..6a01029 100755 --- a/rc.sysinit +++ b/rc.sysinit @@ -29,9 +29,9 @@ if ! /bin/mountpoint -q /dev; then fi /bin/mkdir -p /run/lock /dev/{pts,shm} /bin/chmod 1777 /run/lock -/bin/mountpoint -q /dev/pts || /bin/mount /dev/pts &> /dev/null \ +/bin/mountpoint -q /dev/pts || /bin/mount -n /dev/pts &> /dev/null \ || /bin/mount -n -t devpts devpts /dev/pts -o mode=620,gid=5,nosuid,noexec -/bin/mountpoint -q /dev/shm || /bin/mount /dev/shm &> /dev/null \ +/bin/mountpoint -q /dev/shm || /bin/mount -n /dev/shm &> /dev/null \ || /bin/mount -n -t tmpfs shm /dev/shm -o mode=1777,nosuid,nodev
# remount root ro to allow for fsck later on, we remount now to
Thanks for the patch!
Why doing this ? With /etc/mtab linked to /proc/mounts, why just every time calling in with -n ?
We don't yet have the symlink, until we do we should use "-n" here.
I'm planning to look into the remaining downsides of using libmount and symlinking mtab to /proc/self/monuts, to see if we can make the switch. "The others" are doing it, so hopefully we can join soon. If anyone knows of problems, I'd be interested to know.
Cheers,
Tom
We had some fallout when we inititally did this on the launch of 2.19: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/23014 I'm not sure if this was ever reported to upstream or what the current status of this is. d