On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 21:38 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 12:33:52 +0800
> Ian Kent <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 21:11 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 11:48:15 +0800 (WST)
> > > Ian Kent <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > If the timeout of an autofs mount is set to zero then umounts
> > > > are disabled. This works fine, however the kernel module checks
> > > > the expire timeout and goes no further if it is zero. This is
> > > > not the right thing to do at shutdown as the module is passed
> > > > an option to expire mounts regardless of their timeout setting.
> > >
> > > Is this a new feature, or a regression since <when>?
> >
> > It's a regression which I must have introduced a long time ago. I can go
> > back and check the kernels if you'd like more specific info.
> >
> > It should work this way and a recent report alerted me to it.
> >
>
> Well.. I'm trying to work out if it's a 2.6.18 thing or whether we can
> hold it over.
I had a quick look and it appears to be present as far back as 2002/06
in 2.4. I'm a bit puzzled why I haven't seen it before as I'm sure I've
tested this over the years, never the less it looks so clearly wrong to
me know.
It's a bug fix and given it's been around so long, not a widely used.
Personally I'd like to get it into 2.6.18.
As always I'm happy with whatever decision you make.
Ian
-
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]
