On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 09:18:55AM -0400, Robert Heller wrote: > At Mon, 25 May 2026 13:49:40 +0100 Chris Green <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Andy Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 12:41:30PM +0100, Chris Green wrote: > > > > However it does seem a bit 'unfriendly' to make the system totally > > > > unbootable if a drive that isn't needed at all for the boot process > > > > can't be mounted by fstab.
[...] > > It was a drive used for hourly 'snapshot' backups so needed to be > > mounted normally. I think the nofail mount option would fulfil what I > > need though. > > The autofs/automount option would also work. I've done this to save "wear" of > the backup disk, setting it to spin down and "sleep" when not in use, thus > extending its life. (It would do for the backup disk to wearout *before* the > main live disk(s)...) Around here, the mount/umount are part of the backup procedure (along with an fsck -fn, so I get early warning when the medium gets flaky). I don't want to have that medium mounted (and thus LUKS-unlocked) for longer than necessary. But yes, this is an iteresting topic, because different people tend to have pretty diverse needs/preferences. Cheers -- t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
