View Single Post
Old 08-27-2012, 09:31 AM   #16
knc1
Going Viral
knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.knc1 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
knc1's Avatar
 
Posts: 17,212
Karma: 18210809
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Central Texas
Device: No K1, PW2, KV, KOA
Quote:
Originally Posted by twobob View Post
That doesn't explain why I get no complaint on FAT though (I don't think)
FAT does not support the same permission system that inode file systems do.
Yeah, I know that is obvious, but this morning it seems we keep getting bit by the obvious.

Doing the "insmod" should have created the directory.
It did not, so assume == code missing from the /proc filesystem to do that.

The way you found to make it work, is the way it has to be done in this special case of the configuration having CONFIG_BINFMT == not set.

insmod
mkdir
mount

The last two are a replacement for the /proc system code that got conditionalized away.
The 'net write-ups all presume that CONFIG_BINFMT == M was set in the kernel build.

Last edited by knc1; 08-27-2012 at 09:34 AM.
knc1 is offline   Reply With Quote