On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Keith G. Murphy wrote:
> Is this a known problem?
No. I have never heard of this re-appearing act.
> A Win95 share that I mounted under smbfs will show up as mounted in df,
> and even contain the correct Used/Available info. If I do an 'ls'
on
> the mountpoint, I see no files. If I 'umount' the share, I get the
'not
> mounted' error, but then no longer see the share in df.
Maybe it never actually mounted anything but it wrote something in
/etc/mtab. As root:
# df
Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda1 202220 136282 55498 71% /
...
/dev/sda11 3059728 1060632 1843672 37% /mnt/data
# echo "/dev/sda5 /mnt/empty ext2 ro 0 0" >> /etc/mtab
# df
Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda1 202220 136282 55498 71% /
...
/dev/sda11 3059728 1060632 1843672 37% /mnt/data
/dev/sda5 202220 136282 55498 71% /mnt/empty
# ls -alF /mnt/empty
total 2
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 1024 Apr 14 17:57 ./
drwxr-xr-x 19 root root 1024 Jul 31 17:44 ../
# umount /mnt/empty
umount: /dev/sda5: not found
umount: /mnt/empty: not mounted
Some differences from your description, mainly that the used/available
isn't at all right.
'cat /proc/mounts' shows what is actually mounted. df and mount both
trust
/etc/mtab for what to display (at least the versions I have).
> I just noticed the opposite (of sorts) also happens. I performed the
> sequence below within the space of a few seconds. The share really is
> mounted, but the first df I performed did not show it. Notice also that
> the 2nd df does *not* show the correct Used/Available info.
This is very strange. "old" mount programs would have trouble mounting
smbfs, causing a delay between the mount command and when the mount
becomes useable.
accountant_c is not under automounter control? That could be an idea why
it suddenly appears.
Any funny kernel log messages?
/Urban