On Mon, 15 May 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
>
> And then there is an issue with multiple mounts - which ones should be
> affected by such policy? All of them? The last one? Linus, could you
> elaborate on that - what do you actually want here?
No strong feelings. I do _not_ think that it is bogus that a ramfs cannot
be unmounted when it has data in it, but at the same time I don't actually
feel that it would be bogus to be able to unmount it and lose the data
("hey, you asked for it, you'll get it").
If people think that umount should just work, then sure, as long as ramfs
has some way of cleaning up afterwards (right now I suspect it says
something like "umount: inodes in use - prepare for armageddon" or
whatever the message is)
Linus
