From 3e7472b3d54853389cd8a17475901fbef976ef18 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Schwinge Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 09:27:33 +0200 Subject: IRC. --- hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) (limited to 'hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn') diff --git a/hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn b/hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn index 64e3776e..01bbea42 100644 --- a/hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn +++ b/hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn @@ -184,3 +184,26 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-07-22 status is 644 though but status contains information which anyone can ask to the proc server anyway, I think. + + +# `/proc/mounts`, `/proc/$pid/mounts` + +IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-07-25 + + < pinotree> jkoenig: btw, what do you think about providing empty + /proc/mounts and /proc/$pid/mounts files? + < jkoenig> pinotree, I guess one would have to evaluate the consequences + wrt. existing use cases (in other words, "I have absolutely no clue + whatsoever about whether that would be desirable" :-) + < jkoenig> pinotree, the thing is, an error message like "/proc/mounts: No + such file or directory" is rather explicit, whereas errors which would be + caused by missing data in /proc/mounts would maybe be harder to track + < braunr> this seems reasonable though + < braunr> there already are many servers with e.g. grsecurity or chrooted + environments where mounts is empty + < pinotree> well, currently we also have an empty mtab + < braunr> pinotree: but what do you need that for ? + < braunr> pinotree: the init system ? + < pinotree> and the mnt C api already returns no entries (or it bails out, + i don't remember) + < pinotree> not a strict need -- cgit v1.2.3