Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 22 Feb 1995 16:14:10 -0700
From:      Nate Williams <nate@trout.sri.MT.net>
To:        Garrett Wollman <wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com>
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: mountd changes
Message-ID:  <199502222314.QAA15850@trout.sri.MT.net>
In-Reply-To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu> "Re: mountd changes" (Feb 22,  5:59pm)

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Sigh..  You can't tell me that this makes sense:
> 
> > $ mount freefall:/a /mnt
> > $ mount freefall:/a /mnt
> > $ mount freefall:/a /mnt
> > $ mount freefall:/a /mnt
> > $ df
> > ...
> > freefall:/a                1668222   569434  1015376    36%    /mnt
> > freefall:/a                1668222   569434  1015376    36%    /mnt
> > freefall:/a                1668222   569434  1015376    36%    /mnt
> > freefall:/a                1668222   569434  1015376    36%    /mnt
> 
> Sure, makes perfect sense.  Just as if I said:
> 
> root@khavrinen$ mount -t null /usr/local/X11R6 /mnt
> root@khavrinen$ df
> Filesystem                1K-blocks     Used    Avail Capacity  Mounted on
> /dev/wd0h                    127143    64985    55800    54%    /usr/local
> /usr/local/X11R6             127143    64985    55800    54%    /mnt

No, it *doesn't* make sense at all.  Having multiple mounts is confusing
at best, and down-right dangerous at other times.  (Single-user mode comes
to mind)



Nate



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199502222314.QAA15850>