Lennart Poettering wrote on 17/02/15 10:08: >> > mount something-else /foo >> > systemctl start foo.mount > In this case the second line is a NOP, since the first line already > mounted something on /foo, and thus made foo.mount active.
So, even if foo.mount (the actual unit file) specifies it's What=something (not What=something-else) the fact that *anything* is mounted to /foo is sufficient to make the foo.mount unit active? This seems somewhat counter-intuitive to me. I can understand why from an implementation perspective - the mount units are all geared around the mountpoint not the What=, but it's certainly not what I'd expect as a user. Wouldn't it be better if there was some other state - e.g. "conflict" if something other than the desired device was mounted to the specified destination? Col -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/ Open Source: Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/ PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/ Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/ _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel