Re: ltspfs bug? missing /etc/mtab failure

Just another note on that topic.  There are definitely certain things
(like many FUSE-based filesystems) that rely on a *writable* /etc/mtab
file and that will bork even with the old "ln -s /proc/mounts
/etc/mtab".  I have taken to the "touch" method myself, to avoid these
issues.  Call them "bugs" if you like of those other projects, but
rather than take on the whole OSS world all at once, "touching" the
file is a good way to sweep the dirt under the rug.  :)

An example of a project that requires a writable mtab file is "sshfs".
 I encountered this bug last November when doing some feasibility work
on LOCAL APPS using sshfs.

Cheers,

-Gadi

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 5:05 AM, Oliver Grawert <ogra-GeWIH/[email protected]> wrote:
> hi,
>  Am Montag, den 28.04.2008, 00:11 -0400 schrieb Warren Togami:
>
> >
>  > Workaround: touch /opt/ltsp/i386/etc/mtab
>  >
>  > A blank read-only /etc/mtab is enough to make it work!
>  >
>  > Anyhow, I believe this is a bug in ltspfsd because it really doesn't
>  > need any information in /etc/mtab.  /proc/mounts is often more accurate
>  > anyway if it really does need any info.
>  >
>  > Thoughts?
>  thats how we do it since day one (a grep -r in the plugin dir helps a
>  lot):
>
>  ogra@ceron:~/devel/hardy-ltsp/ltsp-trunk$ cat server/plugins/ltsp-build-client/Ubuntu/010-etc-mtab
>  case "$MODE" in
>     after-install)
>         # divert /etc/mtab and point it to /proc/mounts
>         chroot $ROOT dpkg-divert --package ltsp-client --add --rename \
>                                  --divert /etc/mtab.real /etc/mtab
>         chroot $ROOT ln -sf /proc/mounts /etc/mtab
>         ;;
>  esac
>
>  the divert moves the file out of the way (in case a package will claim
>  it dpkg-divert makes sure such a package doesnt touch it (i.e. on
>  updates)) and then we simply link /proc/mounts to be mtab. mind you, if
>  you have apps that actually rely on the format of mtab which is slightly
>  different to /proc/mounts you are screwed (we dont have such apps in the
>  client chroots usually, but if you ever want to run something like gvfs
>  on a client, which apparently massively relies on such things like
>  fstab, mtab etc, then you will run into probs)
>
>  ciao
>         oli
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
>  Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
>  Use priority code J8TL2D2.
>  http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
> _____________________________________________________________________
>  Ltsp-developer mailing list.   To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
>       https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-developer
>  For additional LTSP help,   try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_____________________________________________________________________
Ltsp-developer mailing list.   To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
      https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-developer
For additional LTSP help,   try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net