On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Richard Weinberger
<richard.weinber...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ronak Desai,
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Ronak Desai
> <ronak.de...@rockwellcollins.com> wrote:
>> I am able to workaround this issue by marking the mount as unbina
On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Richard Weinberger
wrote:
> Ronak Desai,
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 5:40 PM, Ronak Desai
> wrote:
>> I am able to workaround this issue by marking the mount as unbinadable
>> and clearing the flag (CL_COPY_UNBINDABLE) in "copy_tree&q
at 3:50 PM, Ronak Desai
<ronak.de...@rockwellcollins.com> wrote:
> I came across a problem where if the containers are running then it
> affects the unmount process of the system's mount points. I am not
> using these mount points as shared mounts with container.
>
> For examp
at 3:50 PM, Ronak Desai
wrote:
> I came across a problem where if the containers are running then it
> affects the unmount process of the system's mount points. I am not
> using these mount points as shared mounts with container.
>
> For example, I am using SD card and NAND a
I came across a problem where if the containers are running then it
affects the unmount process of the system's mount points. I am not
using these mount points as shared mounts with container.
For example, I am using SD card and NAND as external storage device
and mounting it to a mount point in
I came across a problem where if the containers are running then it
affects the unmount process of the system's mount points. I am not
using these mount points as shared mounts with container.
For example, I am using SD card and NAND as external storage device
and mounting it to a mount point in
6 matches
Mail list logo
