Space saver: mount --bind mention in the book?

Gerard Beekmans gerard at
Mon Sep 30 14:40:46 PDT 2002

On September 30, 2002 03:29 pm, Ian Molton wrote:
> for example, if you use mount --bind to access the packages you want to
> compile, then you acttually are using LESS stuff copied from the host,
> as those packages stay on the host and are never copied to the new LFS.

The point I'm trying to make is that I don't agree with storing anything on 
the host system. It then requires you having access to that partition 
containing that other Linux installation so you can get to your tarballs. If 
you'd ever want to remove that old Linux distro you'd have to copy all the 
tarballs over to the LFS partition anyways. If you mount --bind from redhat's 
/usr/src to LFS' /usr/src you require yourself to keep Redhat around even 
longer because you now use its partition together with LFS. If you remove the 
RH partition, you loose those files. If you don't mount the RH partition you 
don't have access to the files.

To, it's not much different from mounting a MS Windows partition, copy the 
files to the C:\WINDOWS\TEMP directory and then mount --bind it to /usr/src. 
If nothing else, it feels "dirty".

Gerard Beekmans

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list