Re: mount --bind question.
From: Toby A Inkster (UseTheAddressInMySig_at_deadspam.com)
Date: 09/29/03
- Next message: Andy Baxter: "to sig or not to sig?"
- Previous message: Floyd Davidson: "Re: mount --bind question."
- In reply to: Andy Baxter: "mount --bind question."
- Next in thread: Ritesh Kumar: "Re: mount --bind question."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 07:41:52 +0100
Andy Baxter wrote:
> Is there any advantage in using mount --bind to mount a subdirectory of a
> mounted volume somewhere else in the filesystem, rather than simply using a
> symlink?
Yes there is.
Programs can tell that symlinks are symlinks and choose to ignore them
or handle them in some strange way...
-- man find --------------------------------------------
-follow
Dereference symbolic links. Implies -noleaf.
--------------------------------------------------------
-- man mkisofs------------------------------------------
-f Follow symbolic links when generating the filesystem. When this
option is not in use, symbolic links will be entered using Rock
Ridge if enabled, otherwise the file will be ignored.
--------------------------------------------------------
-- man tar ---------------------------------------------
-h, --dereference
don't dump symlinks; dump the files they point to
--------------------------------------------------------
With 'mount --bind' the program effectively has no way of knowing if a
file is really there or just a 'link'.
-- Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?id=132
- Next message: Andy Baxter: "to sig or not to sig?"
- Previous message: Floyd Davidson: "Re: mount --bind question."
- In reply to: Andy Baxter: "mount --bind question."
- Next in thread: Ritesh Kumar: "Re: mount --bind question."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
