Re: [PATCH][CFT] per-process namespaces for Linux

[Ion Badulescu <ionut@moisil.cs.columbia.edu>]

On Wed, 28 Feb 2001 13:07:29 -0500 (EST), Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu> wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, David L. Parsley wrote:

>> Yeah, mount --bind is cool, I've been using it on one of my projects
>> today.  But - maybe I'm just not thinking creatively enough - what are
>> the advantages of mount --bind versus just symlinking?
> 
> 1) Correctly working ".." (obviously relevant only for directories)
> 2) Try to create symlinks on read-only NFS mount. For bonus points, try
> to do that one one client without disturbing everybody else.
> 3) Try to make it different for different users, for that matter.

And disadvantages: you can't have broken symlinks.

This actually turns out to be quite a bit of a problem when one tries
to use bind mounts with autofs. For one thing, it's perfectly legal
to have /autofs/foo as a symlink to /autofs/bar/foo, where /autofs/bar
is not yet mounted -- but a bind mount can't handle that...

Ion

-- 
  It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool,
            than to open it and remove all doubt.