Re: [9fans] Explanation of binding from ftpfs

["Brad Frank" <brad.frank@gmail.com>]

oh yeah, it seems to do a pipe bind to the other location, only when
binding to the root. If I bind to /n/ftp/directory, it doesn't show
the pipe bind in ns.

On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Brad Frank <brad.frank@gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess what confuses me when dealing with something like ftpfs, is
> that it seems to behave differently than other types of binds.
> Examples I've used in the past involve simple binds like this.
> I create 4 directories, let's say dir1, dir2, dir3, dir4.
> Inside dir1 and dir2 I have files.
> I can then:
> bind -b dir1 dir3
> bind -b dir2 dir3
> then I can
> bind -b dir3 dir4
>
> When I look at ns
> I see not only a bind from dir3 to dir4,
> But I also see binds from dir1 to dir4, and dir2 to dir4. The act of
> binding dir3 to dir4 automatically seems to have created binds to dir1
> to dir4, and dir2 to dir4.
>
> So what I guess I was expecting to see from ns when using the ftpfs
> scenario, was to see not only a pipe bind to /n/ftp. But Also a pipe
> bind to my other location, since the other location was a bind to
> /n/ftp.
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Brad Frank <brad.frank@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I forgot to mention when I bind /n/ftp I was really binding
>> /n/ftp/directory to another location.
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 3:44 PM, Brad Frank <brad.frank@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> When I use ftpfs to mount a ftp site and then bind /n/ftp to another
>>> location. All appears to work fine in /n/ftp and in the other
>>> location. When I type ns, I can clearly see the pipe bind for ftpfs
>>> mounted to /n/ftp. When I unmount /n/ftp I can type ls on /n/ftp and
>>> not see anything there. But if I ls on the other location that I bound
>>> to /n/ftp, it still can access the ftp server. How is the other
>>> location able to do this, when I don't see any indication of a pipe
>>> bind still listed in ns? I do see the ftpfs process running, though.
>>>
>>
>