Bug 172817
Summary: | util-linux - manpage for 'mount' appears to make incorrect claims | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Michal Jaegermann <michal> |
Component: | util-linux | Assignee: | Karel Zak <kzak> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Ben Levenson <benl> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-08-21 14:15:04 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Michal Jaegermann
2005-11-10 00:54:17 UTC
There's "autofs" filesystem: # cat /proc/filesystems | grep autofs nodev autofs > There's "autofs" filesystem:
Yes, you are right. For some reasons when I was looking at /prof/filesystems
on rawhide I missed it (or it was not there at that moment) and I assumed that
it is gone.
Still 'man mount' describing '-t auto' behaviour says
.... All of the filesystem types
listed there will be tried, except for those that are labeled
"nodev" ...
and this particular one happens to be "nodev"; while 'auto' type does not
show up on a list of acceptable ones but is only mentioned later on in
sentences like "The auto type may be useful for user-mounted floppies".
Is there any situation when it makes sense to use 'mount -t autofs ...'
in an explicit way? Yes, I know that autofs daemon is using that type.
The mount uses libblkid for filesystem detection in case "-t auto" or in case you run it without "-t". It tries filesystems from /proc/filesystems when the all others possibilities failed (= very exotic filesystem). The "autofs" is really for automounter only. I think the man page is useful enough. Closing. |