From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43AD4138CA3 for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:19:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EA2E4E086C; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:18:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B66D4E0848 for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2015 22:18:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YjxY7-0003a6-0G for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 00:18:47 +0200 Received: from 216.240.144.23 ([216.240.144.23]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 00:18:46 +0200 Received: from w41ter by 216.240.144.23 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 00:18:46 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: walt Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Strange new behavior from the "mount" command Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 15:18:38 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1737884.HMIx8dUkP1@bluering> <3398594.KigUUE6dli@navi> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.240.144.23 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 In-Reply-To: <3398594.KigUUE6dli@navi> X-Archives-Salt: be0933bb-dca5-4bd4-8a27-7eafc046a138 X-Archives-Hash: 1711641680e59b061616fc7cb83cb6db On 04/18/2015 05:33 PM, Fernando Rodriguez wrote: > On Saturday, April 18, 2015 3:59:15 PM walt wrote: >> >> execve("/bin/mount", ["mount"], [/* 61 vars */]) = 0 >> >> That number 61 on the 'bad' machine is 48, though, and I don't know where >> that odd-looking string of characters is generated or what it means. To me >> it looks like a comment in a file of 'c' code. >> >> Still stumped :( > > That would be the number of environment variables passed to execve. strace is > just trying not to be too noisy. > > > Are there any differences in the options used in fstab between both machines, > Especially the auto or noauto options or if one of them is using labels. The > mount(8) man page may have more hints. As a quick-and-dirty way of testing your idea I moved /etc/fstab out of the way. I was surprised to learn that "mount" doesn't care about fstab, and doesn't even bother to look for it (when invoked with no arguments). Using strace I examined the list of files opened by "mount" on both machines and discovered that the "bad" machine reads the same 8 files as the "good" machine, but then proceeds to read /etc/blkid.conf (I don't have that file on either machine) and then /proc/cmdline. (And then proceeds to read all the partition tables, etc) So, what kind of process needs those two files to do its job? I have no idea, but I'm hoping that some of you smart people out there may know.