In message <199901161046.caa47...@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>, Satoshi Asami write s: > * >However, if I try to mount it from B read-only while A is mounting it > * >read-write, it succeeds. This looks dangerous, as A writing data onto > * >the disk could cause B's cache to go stale without B knowing it. Is > * >it a good idea to allow read-only mounts of a dirty filesystem anyway? > * >(The filesystem could be corrupted, right?) > * > * UFS/FFS doesn't expect anybody else to muck about on the device > * while they have it open, and violating that is a bad idea, I cannot > >I know that, but that's not the point here. If the filesystem is >marked dirty, it could very well be corrupted. Why am I allowed to >mount it (even read-only)?
how else would you fsck / if it was dirty ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member p...@freebsd.org "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
