it solves the following case:
root=/dev/nfs nfsroot=server:/path
- the server could be reachable on any interface
- any interface can get an IP by dhcp
- only one IP is allowed to mount the root
---
modules.d/95nfs/nfsroot | 11 +++++------
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/modules.d/95nfs/nfsroot b/modules.d/95nfs/nfsroot
index 5f5b08f..0add977 100755
--- a/modules.d/95nfs/nfsroot
+++ b/modules.d/95nfs/nfsroot
@@ -142,9 +142,9 @@ if [ "$nfs" = "nfs4" ]; then
[ -z "$(pidof rpc.idmapd)" ] && rpc.idmapd
# XXX Should we loop here?
- echo mount -t nfs4 -o$options${nfslock+,$nfslock} \
- $server:$path $NEWROOT > /mount/01-$$-nfs4.sh
- [ -e /dev/root ] || >/dev/root
+ mount -t nfs4 -o$options${nfslock+,$nfslock} \
+ $server:$path $NEWROOT \
+ && { [ -e /dev/root ] || >/dev/root ; }
else
# NFSv{2,3} doesn't support using locks as it requires a helper to transfer
# the rpcbind state to the new root
@@ -152,7 +152,6 @@ else
warn "Locks unsupported on NFSv{2,3}, using nolock" 1>&2
# XXX Should we loop here?
- echo mount -t nfs -o$options${options:+,}nolock $server:$path $NEWROOT \
- > /mount/01-$$-nfs.sh
- [ -e /dev/root ] || >/dev/root
+ mount -t nfs -o$options${options:+,}nolock $server:$path $NEWROOT \
+ && { [ -e /dev/root ] || >/dev/root ; }
fi
--
1.6.2.5
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe initramfs" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
