Now that Al has not yet told me what is wrong with the
device handling scheme outlined, let me do something else
instead and remove some of the backlog for util-linux.
Just released util-linux-2.11n in the usual places.
l-k relevance: blockdev has a --report option as announced
Very off-topic: FSF promotes free software, but produces
message translation files with header
# Copyright (C) 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
and without any indication that these files can be freely
modified and distributed. No GPL or anything. Very unfree.
This is the reason that there still is no up-to-date set
of French messages.
Andries
Hi!
> Now that Al has not yet told me what is wrong with the
> device handling scheme outlined, let me do something else
> instead and remove some of the backlog for util-linux.
> Just released util-linux-2.11n in the usual places.
>
> l-k relevance: blockdev has a --report option as announced
>
> Very off-topic: FSF promotes free software, but produces
> message translation files with header
> # Copyright (C) 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> and without any indication that these files can be freely
> modified and distributed. No GPL or anything. Very unfree.
> This is the reason that there still is no up-to-date set
> of French messages.
Ask RMS... and he is likely to fix that.
Pavel
--
"I do not steal MS software. It is not worth it."
-- Pavel Kankovsky
>> Very off-topic: FSF promotes free software, but produces
>> message translation files with header
>> # Copyright (C) 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>> and without any indication that these files can be freely
>> modified and distributed. No GPL or anything. Very unfree.
> Ask RMS... and he is likely to fix that.
I did. You may well be right. We'll see.
Andries
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 [email protected] wrote:
> >> Very off-topic: FSF promotes free software, but produces
> >> message translation files with header
> >> # Copyright (C) 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> >> and without any indication that these files can be freely
> >> modified and distributed. No GPL or anything. Very unfree.
>
> > Ask RMS... and he is likely to fix that.
>
> I did. You may well be right. We'll see.
ObMount: now that MS_MOVE is in 2.5 (and submitted for merge in 2.4)
mount --move <oldpath> <newpath> would be nice...
Effect of mount(old, new, NULL, MS_MOVE, NULL): subtree mounted at
"old" is taken to "new". Move is atomic and takes all references
to objects in a subtree with it - opened files, current directories,
etc. Requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN.
Errors:
requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN (EPERM)
old and new must exist (ENOENT)
old must be a mountpoint (EINVAL)
new must not be a descendent of old (ELOOP)
old must not be the absolute root (EINVAL)
if old is directory new must be a directory and vice versa (EINVAL)
+ usual set of errors from lookups for old and new (EFAULT if either
is not a valid address, ENOTDIR if component in the middle is not a
directory, ELOOP if too many links, EACCES if no execute permissions
on some component in the middle, ENOMEM if someone's out of memory, EIO
if fs feels like that, etc. - the usual)
> ObMount: now that MS_MOVE is in 2.5 (and submitted for merge in 2.4)
> mount --move <oldpath> <newpath> would be nice...
I think it works (but have not tried).
For docs, see ftp.cwi.nl under ~aeb/manpages or so.
[ftp.win.tue.nl is being reorganised, and ftp.kernel.org is down,
so I made ftp.cwi.nl a temporary repository for man pages]
Andries
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:
> new must not be a descendent of old (ELOOP)
> old must not be the absolute root (EINVAL)
Isn't this second one redundant?
--
"Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.."