From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 18 21:16:51 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6FC937B401 for ; Sun, 18 May 2003 21:16:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (castle.jp.FreeBSD.org [210.226.20.15]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A67D43F3F for ; Sun, 18 May 2003 21:16:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from matusita@jp.FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [::1])h4J4GmY91728 for ; Mon, 19 May 2003 13:16:48 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from matusita@jp.FreeBSD.org) In-Reply-To: <200305190317.h4J3H0M7066994@gw.catspoiler.org> References: <20030518225640.S28986@alpha.siliconlandmark.com> <200305190317.h4J3H0M7066994@gw.catspoiler.org> X-User-Agent: Mew/1.94.2 Emacs/21.3 X-FaceAnim: (-O_O-)(O_O- )(_O- )(O- )(- -)( -O)( -O_)( -O_O)(-O_O-) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Dispatcher: imput version 20030322(IM144) Lines: 10 From: Makoto Matsushita To: current@FreeBSD.org Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 13:16:46 +0900 Message-Id: <20030519131646J.matusita@jp.FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: 5.1-BETA umount problems X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 04:16:52 -0000 truckman> IMHO, "umount -f /lib" should have failed in this case. I don't think so. -f means 'force', so it should be successed even if this cause something trouble to running system. If it would be unacceptable, there's easy way to solve it: don't use -f anymore, or add a new umount(8) option to do that. -- - Makoto `MAR' Matsushita