From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41648 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965432AbcDMK2S (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2016 06:28:18 -0400 Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 12:28:13 +0200 From: Karel Zak To: Robby Workman Cc: util-linux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: v2.29 plan: kill mtab Message-ID: <20160413102813.hpmekfhelugpubt4@ws.net.home> References: <20160411205934.blmh2xx3bgxw4vwm@ws.net.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Sender: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 07:33:08PM -0700, Robby Workman wrote: > > This discussion is really not about init, but about mtab that is > > broken by design. > > Okay, then how about this? Our current use of /etc/mtab works well btw, mount(8) supports /etc/mtab -> /proc/mounts symlink for 20 years... > for us, and as far as I'm aware, we've experienced absolutely > none of this "[breakage] by design" - as such, we'd be grealy > appreciative if the option remains to continue using it. We're trying to be friendly to all Linux users ...so we're going to #ifdef mtab stuff and keep --enable-libmount-support-mtab there for the next years to keep you happy. Maybe one day you will enter wonderful 21 century where we have Linux namespaces, containers, bind mounts, mount move operation, chroots, btrfs, NFS and another cool stuff... and then you will see that there is a fundamental difference between "what kernel thinks about VFS" and "how users call mount(8)". Fair enough? Karel -- Karel Zak http://karelzak.blogspot.com