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>