Re: [9fans] v9fs question

[sqweek <sqweek@gmail.com>]

 You'll notice it still tries mount(2) after stat(2) reveals that
mount.9p doesn't exist. mount(8) always looks for a helper and will
call it if it exists, but it doesn't fail when no helper is present.
 As others have said, mount(2) doesn't do name resolution, but by my
reading that should give you an "Invalid argument" error instead of
"Protocol not supported". However the only place I see EPROTONOSUPPORT
looks like an impossible code path... unless you have CONFIG_9P_FS
enabled in your kernel but not CONFIG_NET_9P... which also shouldn't
be possible with a current kernel. What version are you running?
 Anyway, note that if you auth you'll need supporting software from
p9p also. Factotum and srv -a, in particular, then give v9fs a -o
trans=unix.

 Oh, and to preempt the question why 9mount is not packaged as
mount.9p - mount(8) requires that you are root or your mount target is
in fstab with '-o user' before calling the helper, defeating the
purpose of an SUID mount.9p.
-sqweek


2009/7/12 Tim Newsham <newsham@lava.net>:
> On Sat, 11 Jul 2009, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
>>
>> Hmmm, that's really new behavior-- never used to fail without mount
>> helper. Can you give the exact error message?
>
>  # strace -o trace.txt mount -t 9p thenewsh.com /mnt
>  mount: Protocol not supported
>
> Trace.txt is attached with full details.
>
> I've tried several variants, such as thenewsh.com:/path
> with similar results.
>
>> On Jul 11, 2009, at 1:46 PM, Tim Newsham <newsham@lava.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The documentation in the linux kernel says you merely
>>>
>>>  mount -t 9p ipaddress /mntpoint
>>>
>>> this fails on my system since /sbin/mount tries to execute /sbin/mount.9p
>>> and fails.  Am I supposed to have an /sbin/mount.9p? (Anyone know which
>>> ubunutu package should have this?  If not, where I might find sources?
>>> Ironic since Ubuntu came with the 9p kernel module)  Or should I be using a
>>> different mount program for the purpose?
>>>
>>> The linux Documentation/filesystems/9p.txt should probably be updated
>>> with more details, either way.