Hello!
> > Once running, I noticed errors from the init scripts about trying to mount
> > /proc. I've disabled the explict mount of /proc to work around the problem.
> > But what's going on? It seems that once devfsd is running there is an
> > implicit mounting of /proc? Is this normal behaviour?
I don't know the exact reasons, but that's what I see as well (I looked a
few months ago). Personally, I have no problems with kernel mounting all
the supported "internal" filesystems (procfs, devfs, devptf, usbdevfs) at
startup. But the interdependency between devfs and procfs being mounted
is indeed weird.
Since this feature seems to be undocumented and can go away, I prefer not
to rely on it and use the following command to mount procfs if it needs to
be mounted:
mount -a -t procfs
This command doesn't generate any errors if /proc is already mounted.
> You don't mention which distribution you're using, it's probably a
> distribution issue.
It may be a distribution issue, because some distributions try mounting
filesystems explicitly at startup, whike others more or less rely on "-a"
option to mount.
> My start script for Debian mounts /proc because that's the only way to
> determine whether it's already running.
I don't understand. What is running? To check if /proc is mounted, one
can check existance of /proc/mounts - if it's missing, /proc is not
mounted. But "mount -a -t procfs" is much more graceful in my opinion.
> Why is this a problem?
I understand that an error message is a problem - the system should not
report errors if everything is Ok.
--
Regards,
Pavel Roskin
|