On Jul 3, 2014, at 12:43 PM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 12:00 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> What about a new fs_passno value of -1 that means "use default for this file
>> system type", and systemd spawns fsck based on the recommendation of that
>> file system's devs?
>
> How
On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 12:00 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> What about a new fs_passno value of -1 that means "use default for this file
> system type", and systemd spawns fsck based on the recommendation of that
> file system's devs?
How should the file system devs communicate their current
recomm
On Jul 3, 2014, at 6:23 AM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> Hm, the only way this would get re-fscked in the system is if it is
> explicitly configured to be in /etc/fstab... Shouldn't we just give
> people what they ask for?
In practice, often the wrong thing is happening these days. Users and distros
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 02:23:57PM +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 11:49:20AM +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> >> Am 02.07.2014 14:29, schrieb Daniel Drake:
> >> > If I'm reading things right, actually the
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 11:49:20AM +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>> Am 02.07.2014 14:29, schrieb Daniel Drake:
>> > If I'm reading things right, actually the default behaviour is (when
>> > no hints are supplied in kernel cmdline)
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 11:49:20AM +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 02.07.2014 14:29, schrieb Daniel Drake:
> > If I'm reading things right, actually the default behaviour is (when
> > no hints are supplied in kernel cmdline) :
> > 1. systemd runs fsck on root from initramfs
> > 2. systemd mount
Am 02.07.2014 14:29, schrieb Daniel Drake:
> If I'm reading things right, actually the default behaviour is (when
> no hints are supplied in kernel cmdline) :
> 1. systemd runs fsck on root from initramfs
> 2. systemd mounts root fs ro
> 3. switch-root onto real system
> 4. systemd-fsck-root ru
В Wed, 2 Jul 2014 12:33:01 -0600
Chris Murphy пишет:
>
> On Jul 2, 2014, at 5:39 AM, Daniel Drake wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to understand dracut/systemd fsck behaviour, in the context
> > of an ext4 filesystem root mounted read-only from dracut, remaining
> > read-only even when the
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 12:33:01PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Jul 2, 2014, at 5:39 AM, Daniel Drake wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to understand dracut/systemd fsck behaviour, in the context
> > of an ext4 filesystem root mounted read-only from dracut, remaining
> > read-only even w
On Jul 2, 2014, at 5:39 AM, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to understand dracut/systemd fsck behaviour, in the context
> of an ext4 filesystem root mounted read-only from dracut, remaining
> read-only even when the system is fully booted (kiosk-style).
>
> I see that systemd's fstab-
'Twas brillig, and Colin Guthrie at 02/07/14 14:07 did gyre and gimble:
> I guess that as most people use initramfs', an extra
> ConditionPathExists!=/run/initfamfs/skip-root-fsck wouldn't go astray,
> and dracut+co could learn to touch that file if they've properly
> analysed and taken care of roo
'Twas brillig, and Daniel Drake at 02/07/14 13:43 did gyre and gimble:
> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
>>> Then the system continues booting, switches root, and then
>>> system-fsck-root.service starts from the root fs, and runs fsck on /
>>> again. This is the bit I
'Twas brillig, and Daniel Drake at 02/07/14 13:29 did gyre and gimble:
> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
>> Thinking about it, I'm not sure how the new systemd would know that
>> systemd-fsck@dev-something.service from the initramfs is the same
>> thing as syst
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
>> Then the system continues booting, switches root, and then
>> system-fsck-root.service starts from the root fs, and runs fsck on /
>> again. This is the bit I don't understand - we already checked from
>> the initramfs, why check again n
On Wed, 02.07.14 12:39, Daniel Drake (dr...@endlessm.com) wrote:
> Then the system continues booting, switches root, and then
> system-fsck-root.service starts from the root fs, and runs fsck on /
> again. This is the bit I don't understand - we already checked from
> the initramfs, why check agai
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> Thinking about it, I'm not sure how the new systemd would know that
> systemd-fsck@dev-something.service from the initramfs is the same
> thing as systemd-fsck-root.service. Maybe that's the problem?
>
> Currently systemd-fsck-ro
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 12:39:54PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to understand dracut/systemd fsck behaviour, in the context
> of an ext4 filesystem root mounted read-only from dracut, remaining
> read-only even when the system is fully booted (kiosk-style).
>
> I see that syste
Hi,
I'm trying to understand dracut/systemd fsck behaviour, in the context
of an ext4 filesystem root mounted read-only from dracut, remaining
read-only even when the system is fully booted (kiosk-style).
I see that systemd's fstab-generator rightly creates a mount unit for
/sysroot from the init
18 matches
Mail list logo
