> No. As explained in the same earlier threads; without this change the
> behavior of shared-subtrees leads to inconsistency and confusion in some
> scenarios.
>
> Under the premise that no application should depend on this behavior
> (most-recent-mount-visible v/s top-most-mount-visible),
The strongest argument against was that
mount foo .; umount .
would no longer be a no-op.
> Al Viro permitted this change. And this is certainly the right
> behavior.
Which is a contradiction in term, since you are saying that
applications _do_ depend on it.
Miklos
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
