Re: Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-28 Thread Jonathan de Boyne Pollard
Simon McVittie: If sshd uses (or can be made to use) IP_FREEBIND to remove the potential dependency on bringing up network interfaces, then /lib/systemd/system/ssh.service could have DefaultDependencies=no, RequiresMountsFor=/usr /lib /etc, and drop its dependency on network.target.

Re: Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-28 Thread Jonathan de Boyne Pollard
Vincent Danjean: I found another issue with systemd and noauto. [...] Do you think I should do a bugreport ? Not until you've constructed a far better description, because your current description is this: 1. I have several lines in /etc/fstab that all have noauto. 2. systemd is obeying

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-24 Thread Noel Torres
On Monday, 24 de November de 2014 07:33:38 Matthias Urlichs escribió: Hi, Noel Torres: Anyway I see that you do not use the noauto option. Is that on purpose? What? It's the very first option. My fault. My eyes looked for defaults,noauto while I was searching for just noauto. In any

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-23 Thread Christian Hofstaedtler
* Simon McVittie s...@debian.org [141122 20:36]: Perhaps more to the point, Debian's initramfs-generator has been modified to mount /usr as well as the root, so only systems that have no initramfs *and* split /usr will get as far as exec()ing systemd without first mounting /usr (which is a

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-23 Thread Vincent Danjean
On 20/11/2014 21:44, Simon McVittie wrote: noauto is appropriate for detachable/removable media that are not normally present. The other option for such media is to leave them out of fstab altogether, and use something like udisks to mount them on-demand: that's what you'd typically do in

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-23 Thread Noel Torres
On Sunday, 23 de November de 2014 15:09:53 Vincent Danjean escribió: On 20/11/2014 21:44, Simon McVittie wrote: noauto is appropriate for detachable/removable media that are not normally present. The other option for such media is to leave them out of fstab altogether, and use something

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-23 Thread Matthias Urlichs
Hi, Noel Torres: Anyway I see that you do not use the noauto option. Is that on purpose? What? It's the very first option. In any case, I can see why three entries for the same mountpoint don't exactly fit systemd's view of the world -- I wouldn't get that idea either, since mount

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Adam Borowski
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 05:51:47PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: As I understand it, sysvinit didn't care whether mountall.sh succeeded or failed. This doesn't come from ignorance. What can you do in this situation? * throw your hands up, abort booting. Hope the admin enjoys a drive to the

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Matthias Urlichs
Hi, Adam Borowski: * systemd: in preinst, check if any fstab lines without noauto or nofail are not currently mounted -- if so, abort the installation as it would result in an unbootable system. In theory, sshd could start much earlier. Right now it (indirectly) depends on networking,

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Russ Allbery
Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl writes: There's currently no way to express which mounts are needed for which functionality. While that's true, I'm not sure that fine-grained control of this is required here. We can get a long way with just a way to indicate whether a mount is important or

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Quoting Russ Allbery (2014-11-22 18:01:12) I also like the idea of not having ssh depend on all local file systems to be mounted. I think it's going to be pretty rare to have a system that has /lib and /etc mounted but can't start ssh. In theory, that's possible with a split / and /usr,

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Simon McVittie
On 22/11/14 17:01, Russ Allbery wrote: I think it's going to be pretty rare to have a system that has /lib and /etc mounted but can't start ssh. In theory, that's possible with a split / and /usr, but as we've discussed in other threads, that's an extremely unusual configuration these days.

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Russ Allbery
Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk writes: Quoting Russ Allbery (2014-11-22 18:01:12) I also like the idea of not having ssh depend on all local file systems to be mounted. I think it's going to be pretty rare to have a system that has /lib and /etc mounted but can't start ssh. In theory,

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Matthias Klumpp
2014-11-22 20:30 GMT+01:00 Russ Allbery r...@debian.org: Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk writes: Quoting Russ Allbery (2014-11-22 18:01:12) I also like the idea of not having ssh depend on all local file systems to be mounted. I think it's going to be pretty rare to have a system that has

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 07:17:55PM +, Simon McVittie wrote: If sshd uses (or can be made to use) IP_FREEBIND to remove the potential dependency on bringing up network interfaces, then /lib/systemd/system/ssh.service could have DefaultDependencies=no, RequiresMountsFor=/usr /lib /etc, and

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
]] Jonas Smedegaard Quoting Russ Allbery (2014-11-22 18:01:12) I also like the idea of not having ssh depend on all local file systems to be mounted. I think it's going to be pretty rare to have a system that has /lib and /etc mounted but can't start ssh. In theory, that's possible

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Simon McVittie
On 22/11/14 19:54, Matthias Klumpp wrote: (Maybe systemd has smarter methods for that case which I don't know of) I think RequiresMountsFor is what you're looking for. ConditionFileExists is not the right thing here: the Condition* family more or less means if the condition is absent, behave as

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Quoting Tollef Fog Heen (2014-11-22 21:52:10) ]] Jonas Smedegaard Quoting Russ Allbery (2014-11-22 18:01:12) I also like the idea of not having ssh depend on all local file systems to be mounted. I think it's going to be pretty rare to have a system that has /lib and /etc mounted but

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-22 Thread Matthias Klumpp
2014-11-22 22:10 GMT+01:00 Simon McVittie s...@debian.org: On 22/11/14 19:54, Matthias Klumpp wrote: (Maybe systemd has smarter methods for that case which I don't know of) I think RequiresMountsFor is what you're looking for. ConditionFileExists is not the right thing here: the Condition*

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-21 Thread Noel Torres
On Thursday, 20 de November de 2014 20:44:17 Simon McVittie escribió: On 20/11/14 19:06, Noel Torres wrote: On Thursday, 20 de November de 2014 17:53:27 Marco d'Itri escribió: On Nov 20, Sam Hartman hartm...@debian.org wrote: The first issue (fstab now fatally blocks boot) is something the

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-21 Thread Russ Allbery
Noel Torres env...@rolamasao.org writes: Many thanks I do not understand, then, how this is different from what sysvinit's mountall.sh does (or at least what I understand it does). As I understand it, sysvinit didn't care whether mountall.sh succeeded or failed. So even if a bunch of

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-21 Thread Paul Wise
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Noel Torres wrote: I do not understand, then, how this is different from what sysvinit's mountall.sh does (or at least what I understand it does). The difference is that it appears to ignore the exit code of mount calls, meaning it acts as if everything in

Re: systemd, fstab, noauto and nofail

2014-11-20 Thread Simon McVittie
On 20/11/14 19:06, Noel Torres wrote: On Thursday, 20 de November de 2014 17:53:27 Marco d'Itri escribió: On Nov 20, Sam Hartman hartm...@debian.org wrote: The first issue (fstab now fatally blocks boot) is something the systemd maintainers have considered (as I understand it) and rejected.