Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 16:56:07 +0100 From: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 'mount -u' stumper Message-ID: <20110622165607.2652ddbd@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <201106221254.p5MCsrP9057641@mail.r-bonomi.com> References: <20110622131035.6b773e6a@gumby.homeunix.com> <201106221254.p5MCsrP9057641@mail.r-bonomi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. noatime and async also do nothing in combination with ro, but mount will still display them: # mount -o ro,noatime,async /dev/md31 /mnt/t # mount | grep md31 /dev/md31 on /mnt/t (ufs, asynchronous, local, noatime, read-only)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110622165607.2652ddbd>