'mount -u' stumper
bonomi at mail.r-bonomi.com
Wed Jun 22 21:19:04 UTC 2011
> From owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org Wed Jun 22 10:57:33 2011
> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 16:56:07 +0100
> From: RW <rwmaillists at googlemail.com>
> To: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: 'mount -u' stumper
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 07:54:53 -0500 (CDT)
> Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > That's a large part of why I want to make it 'go away'. It _is_ a
> > "lie" on a RO system. Meaningless, and 'misleading' if you don't see
> > the RO option as well.
> > When the filesystem _does_ need to be RW, I _want_ softupdates
> > enabled. It's a 'good thing' then;. When it's initially mounted RO
> > softupdates are _visibly_ off. I just want to restore that precise
> > situaion/presentation when i 'update' mount thefilesystem to RO.
> I'd argue the other way around, that mount should display what's
> configured even if some options do nothing in combination.
I wouldn't argue very hard about that. what I _really_ want is
'consistency', As it is, If I have updated mounted the RO filesystem as
RW, and then update mount it again, _back_to_ RO, I get a security
alert overnight because things "aren't the same" as they were previously.
Insult to injury, next time I reboot -- even _months_ later -- I get
*_another* bogus security alert, because 'soft-updates' has (finally!)
disappeared from the mount listing..
More information about the freebsd-questions