Richard.L.Hamilton@mindwarp.smart.net (Richard L. Hamilton) wrote:
> In article <cee1ds$dau$1@bluegill.adi.com>,
> schulz@adi.com (Thomas Schulz) writes:
>
> > It would only expose /etc, the rest of the file systems would still be
> > hidden. If you only need to read, you could add '-o ro' to the mount
> > command.
>
> Since lofs only affects directory names, I doubt that making the lofs mount
> ro when the fs mounted from was rw would do any good, although I haven't
> tried it.

Pre-Solaris 10, read-only lofs only effected directory entries. As
part of the Zones project, read-only lofs was fully implemented, so:

mount -Flofs -o ro /etc /tmp/etc

will make a read-only view of /etc/ available in /tmp/etc.

- jonathan

Thomas Schulz wrote:
> It would only expose /etc, the rest of the file systems would still be
> hidden. If you only need to read, you could add '-o ro' to the mount
> command.

Mounting "lofs" with "ro" has little effect on files as only directory
entries are "mirrored".

----

Bye,
Roland

--
__ . . __
(o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz@nrubsig.org
\__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
/O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090
(;O/ \/ \O

In article <410C6275.FF591984@nrubsig.org>,
Roland Mainz <roland.mainz@nrubsig.org> writes:
> Thomas Schulz wrote:
>> It would only expose /etc, the rest of the file systems would still be
>> hidden. If you only need to read, you could add '-o ro' to the mount
>> command.
>
> Mounting "lofs" with "ro" has little effect on files as only directory
> entries are "mirrored".

In Solaris 10, a "ro" lofs mount does restrict the looped back
files to "ro" too, rather than whatever their native filesystem
dictated.

--
Andrew Gabriel
Consultant Software Engineer

Andrew Gabriel wrote:
>
> In article <410C6275.FF591984@nrubsig.org>,
> Roland Mainz <roland.mainz@nrubsig.org> writes:
> > Thomas Schulz wrote:
> >> It would only expose /etc, the rest of the file systems would still be
> >> hidden. If you only need to read, you could add '-o ro' to the mount
> >> command.
> >
> > Mounting "lofs" with "ro" has little effect on files as only directory
> > entries are "mirrored".
>
> In Solaris 10, a "ro" lofs mount does restrict the looped back
> files to "ro" too, rather than whatever their native filesystem
> dictated.

How does that affect performance ? And can I now "stack" multiple "lofs"
mounts, too (e.g. link from lofs to lofs to lofs to real filesystzem) ?

----

Bye,
Roland

P.S.: There is no hope to get fix (assuming that a non-functional "ro"
mode in lofs is considered as bug... that ported back to older
releases, right ?

--
__ . . __
(o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz@nrubsig.org
\__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
/O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090
(;O/ \/ \O