Stephen Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "John" == John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> John> Indeed. It happened to me again today.
>
> While watching my laptop shut-down last night, I noticed that mountd & nsfd
> *do* get stopped prior to the PCMCIA shutdown.
This is only
> "John" == John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> Indeed. It happened to me again today.
While watching my laptop shut-down last night, I noticed that mountd & nsfd
*do* get stopped prior to the PCMCIA shutdown.
Maybe they're just not getting stopped hard enough :)
--
Stephen
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I actually originally reported it against sysvinit but he reassigned
>it to mount. I have set its priority to critical because it can (and
>HAS!) cause extensive data loss; definately not a wishlist issue!
>
>I will let the m
Stephen Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, that won't work if the NFS mounts live below the local mounts in
> the file-system tree. The local mounts will report busy.
Blat. You're right.
>
> John> * When I shutdown my desktop, it will hang trying to
> John> umount.
>
> I sugge
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Goerzen) wrote on 10.04.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Therefore, I believe it would be prudent, as a temporary workaround
> > for the kernel bug, to umount all local drives before umounting
> > network drives. It is general
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Goerzen) wrote on 10.04.98 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Therefore, I believe it would be prudent, as a temporary workaround
> for the kernel bug, to umount all local drives before umounting
> network drives. It is generally not a big deal if a network drive
> doesn't get umo
> "John" == John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
John> not umount local drives. Therefore, I believe it would be
John> prudent, as a temporary workaround for the kernel bug, to
John> umount all local drives before umounting network drives. It
No, that won't work if the
Vincent Renardias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (speaking a 'mount' maintainer)
>
> I agree crash disks aren't fun at all, however from this email and from
> your previous bug report, I fail to see where 'mount' is involved in this
> infortunate process:
Thanks for your reply, Vincent It w
[Following up on debian-devel]
On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, John Goerzen wrote:
> I reported a similar bug 33 days ago against mount (#19039). It has been
> ignored by the maintainer of mount. I warned then, and I repeat today,
> that this bug CAN and DOES cause filesystem corruption!
>
9 matches
Mail list logo