On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 06:49:20PM -0400, Ross Walker wrote: > On May 17, 2010, at 6:44 PM, Ray Van Dolson <rayvd at bludgeon.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 06:41:40PM -0400, Ross Walker wrote: > >> On May 17, 2010, at 5:37 PM, R P Herrold <herrold at centos.org> wrote: > >> > >>> On Mon, 17 May 2010, Phil Schaffner wrote: > >>> > >>>> Stephen Harris wrote on 05/17/2010 12:15 PM: > >>>>> Don't do NFS localhost mounts from fstab > >>>> > >>>> Why would you want to do localhost: NFS mounts anyway? > >>> > >>> Perhaps for a restricted 'regrafting' RO overmount down in a > >>> autobuilder's chroot tree, rather than a 'bind' mount ? I can > >>> see some rare uses for it as a way to solve ACL problems > >> > >> Since these are RO to local system why not mount them "soft,intr"? > >> > >> Or you could use automount. > > > > I didn't realize you couldn't do bind mounts read-only. Interesting. > > > > What about re-mounting the same block device (presumably as ext3) in > > ro > > mode at another mountpoint? > > > > Or if that complained, maybe created an additional block device under > > /dev with identical major/minor numbers and mounting *that* RO? > > > > Maybe ext3 wouldn't handle that too well... > > Do not try that, at best it will give you inconsistent views of the > file system, at worse it will scramble your file system. > > -Ross I would like to try it, but definitely do not try it on data you can't afford to lose. :)