Re: forceful unmount
Guest section DW (dwguest@win.tue.nl)
Tue, 22 Dec 1998 18:36:55 +0100 (MET)
From owner-linux-kernel-outgoing@vger.rutgers.edu Tue Dec 22 15:32:15 1998
Received: from root@svin01.win.tue.nl [131.155.70.70] by svin07.win.tue.nl (8.8.7)
for <dwguest@svin07.win.tue.nl>
id PAA09456 (ESMTP). Tue, 22 Dec 1998 15:32:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: from nic.funet.fi [128.214.248.6] by svin01.win.tue.nl (8.8.7)
for <dwguest@win.tue.nl>
id PAA05945 (ESMTP). Tue, 22 Dec 1998 15:32:12 +0100 (MET)
Received: from vger.rutgers.edu ([128.6.190.2]:46151 "EHLO vger.rutgers.edu" ident: "NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]") by nic.funet.fi with ESMTP id <1095-2280>; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 16:29:15 +0200
Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <154190-31090>; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 08:12:26 -0500
Received: from arthur.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE ([134.93.8.175]:41531 "EHLO arthur.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE" ident: "kubla") by vger.rutgers.edu with ESMTP id <154680-31090>; Tue, 22 Dec 1998 08:11:32 -0500
Received: (from kubla@localhost)
by arthur.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA06488;
Tue, 22 Dec 1998 15:12:49 +0100 (MET)
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 15:12:49 +0100
From: Dominik Kubla <dominik.kubla@uni-mainz.de>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: "RPICHAI.IN.ORACLE.COM" <RPICHAI.IN.oracle.com.ofcmail@in.oracle.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: forceful unmount
Message-ID: <19981222151249.A6453@arthur.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE>
References: <199812211828.NAA17264@dwarpal.in.oracle.com> <m0zsBZ0-0007U1C@the-village.bc.nu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.94.15i
In-Reply-To: <m0zsBZ0-0007U1C@the-village.bc.nu>; from Alan Cox on Mon, Dec 21, 1998 at 08:04:20PM +0000
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Sender: owner-linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
On Mon, Dec 21, 1998 at 08:04:20PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Why does LInux not support forceful unmount of file systems? Other
> > Operating systems
> > do support this feature; whenever they forcefully unmount a fs, they bother to
>
> man fuser , and for NFS we support umount -f for those cases where the NFS
> server chokes, explodes or otherwises renders itself non-optimal
>
Sorry to apear somewhat nit-picking: but that seems not to be the case.
I have a kernel who claims to support this, i have a mount which claims to
support this compiled against said kernel. When i try "umount -f" on
a NFS volume i simply get the message that it is not supported.
Dominik Kubla
--
The text above represents my personal opinion and does not represent the
official position of my employer on the issue(s) discussed. Any official
statement by me on behalf of my employer will be marked as such.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/