Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:11:25 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Feenberg <feenberg@nber.org> To: Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com> Subject: Re: Shouldn't GNU tar be ignoring /proc with --one-file-system? Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.64.1111181510570.4051@nber6> In-Reply-To: <92484812-3407-4A4B-B1BB-E0B5F3EDD06C@strauser.com> References: <201111181727.pAIHR9XZ057564@mail.r-bonomi.com> <92484812-3407-4A4B-B1BB-E0B5F3EDD06C@strauser.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011, Kirk Strauser wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Robert Bonomi wrote:
>
>> See the output of 'mount(8)' for the names of all the mounted filesystems on
>> your machine.
>
> $ mount | grep proc
> procfs on /proc (procfs, local)
>
>>
>> *NOTE*WELL* that '/proc' is *not* a separate filesystem. It is merely a
>> _directory_ with a bunch of 'special' files in it.
>
> I'm confused here. In what way isn't /proc a separate filesystem? It's
> even called "procfs".
I just went to an 8.1 system as root and did:
umount /proc
and /proc dismounted leaving an empty directory in route. I then went
mount /proc
and /proc was mounted again, using the parameters in /etc/fstab. Surely
that means that going from / to /proc is "crossing a filesystem boundary".
To me that suggests it is a separate filesystem, and typically /proc is
filled with stuff that you wouldn't want to recurse through, so I wouldn't
think it a good candidate for special casing as non-mounted.
Daniel Feenberg
NBER
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.1111181510570.4051>