Greg Wooledge [2021-07-15 07:00:40] wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 12:55:11PM +0300, Reco wrote:
>> "nofail" is really needed for removable devices, because whoever
>> designed systemd made an "interesting" decision to halt the boot process
>> (i.e. host is inaccessible by network, console access only) even if a
>> single filesystem mentioned in fstab fails to mount.
> This was the traditional behavior before systemd, so one can't really
> fault systemd for continuing the practice.
That's not my recollection. AFAIK before systemd, you'd just get an
error message and the boot would just (try to) continue.
I don't think systemd's decision is bad. But I think it's implementation is
not good enough: it should offer some kind of simple "continue
y/n?" prompt.
[ "Simple" for the user: the implementation might be not so simple. ]
To be honest, I've added the `nofail` pretty much everywhere and hence
haven't faced this problem recently, so for all I know, the
implementation has already been improved. But the behavior I saw back
when moving to systemd was definitely not pleasant.
Stefan
