I am not sure I agree with this. These are implimentation details as to how mounts work (and always have), and describing them like this as if they are higher-level issues is silly.
> Miod Vallat wrote on Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 07:07:46PM +0000: > > Otto Moerbeek wrote: > > >> It's not a bug, see mount(2). > > You meant mount(8). > > All the same, in view of the code in /usr/src/sys/kern/vfs_lookup.c, > function lookup, near ISDOTDOT, please consider: > > Index: mount.2 > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libc/sys/mount.2,v > retrieving revision 1.38 > diff -u -r1.38 mount.2 > --- mount.2 1 Jun 2007 06:27:57 -0000 1.38 > +++ mount.2 8 Sep 2007 20:37:44 -0000 > @@ -67,7 +67,9 @@ > Any files in > .Fa dir > at the time > -of a successful mount are swept under the carpet, so to speak, and > +of a successful mount except > +.Dq \&.\&. > +are swept under the carpet, so to speak, and > are unavailable until the filesystem is unmounted. > .Pp > The following
