On 21 Jan 2014 04:57, "Steve Langasek" <vor...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 07:09:51PM -0800, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > > I would add the very presence of the "mountall" tool to this > > list. Lennart has described the issues with mountall in > > https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LennartPoetteringTheOneAndOnly/posts/ip8e1DqJdxT , > > and apparently the upstart developers have been aware them as well since > > the very beginning (at least since Ubuntu 8.04) > > I will not respond to this except to say that I do not agree with Lennart's > characterization of mountall as evidence that upstart's model is incorrect.
Given <https://plus.google.com/+KaySievers/posts/C3chC26khpq#z13jjz3zyofuv3122230ufubgwvfv1myv04#1390263990323502>Scott James Remnant's agreement with Lennart (in a comment on https://plus.google.com/+KaySievers/posts/C3chC26khpq, around 1UTC on Jan 21st)... "Hindsight certainly lends a different perspective, and I'd be the first person to say that Upstart doesn't work as intended. +Lennart Poettering makes a great point about mountall in a recent post, it was written because Upstart couldn't do the complex filesystem cases it was designed to be able to do; and I was very aware even at the time that was a failure that would need to be addressed." ...it seems that further discussion of these design issues might be a good idea. At the least, there should be some progress on the Upstart bug tracker indicating the shape of a solution for the mountall and The "and/or" bugs (and any other design issues). Cheers, Dave.
