AW: AW: [SunHELP] graphical login & umount -af / umountall -k

[Ballweg, Christian]

I thought the same thing, until i read this lines (from man ufsdump), =
esp.
the 2nd:
	A file system is inactive when it is unmouned or the
	system  is  in  single user mode.  A file system is not con-
	sidered inactive if one tree of the file system is quiescent
	while another tree has files or directories being modified.

Chris
> -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von:	Dale Ghent [SMTP:daleg at elemental.org]
> Gesendet am:	Freitag, 6. April 2001 18:31
> An:	'sunhelp at sunhelp.org'
> Betreff:	Re: AW: [SunHELP] graphical login & umount -af / umountall
> -k
>=20
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Ballweg, Christian wrote:
>=20
> | Hi Dale,
> |=20
> | as far as i understood this it isn't sufficient to do this.
> | Anyway: why not?
> | This is a general problem I want to fix.
>=20
> I believe the goal of quiessing the devices (someone please correct =
me if
> I'm wrong) is so that data is not changing while ufsdump is doing =
it's
> job.
>=20
> Well, data only changes if you write to it. Thus would write-locking =
the
> device(s) in question be sufficient? Reads shouldnt interfere (and =
atime
> updates are prevented when write-locking is turned on). This strikes =
me as
> a less intrusive approach to solving the "everybody be
> still!" requirements of ufsdump.
>=20
> /dale
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> SunHELP maillist  -  SunHELP at sunhelp.org
> http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/sunhelp