Hi systemd developers,
My name is Bjørn Forsman and this is my first post to this list. I
have a question/issue with the behaviour of (auto)mount units.
When a mount unit fails (repeatedly), it takes the corresponding
automount unit down with it. To me this breaks a very nice property
I'd like to
Hello Anton,
please reply on the list too.
Anton Gerasimov [2016-09-20 10:22 +0200]:
> yes, I think it can be due to missing udev rules. But if the device node
> is actually there, doesn't it mean that it was noticed by systemd?
No, only devices with a "systemd" udev tag get represented in syste
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
>
> Anton Gerasimov [2016-09-20 11:37 +0200]:
>> Yes, just adding 'KERNEL=="hda" TAGS+="systemd"' to udev rules did the
>> trick. Thank you!
>
> That means you are missing /lib/udev/rules.d/99-systemd.rules for some
> reason.
>
I'm not sure if l
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Andrei Borzenkov
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Martin Pitt
> wrote:
> >
> > Anton Gerasimov [2016-09-20 11:37 +0200]:
> >> Yes, just adding 'KERNEL=="hda" TAGS+="systemd"' to udev rules did the
> >> trick. Thank you!
> >
> > That means you are missing
Hello Martin, hello Andrei
Yes it was all due to missing 99-systemd.rules (udevdir wasn't set
properly for dracut). /sys/block/hda is present.
Thanks,
Anton Gerasimov
On 09/20/16 12:42, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello Anton,
>
> please reply on the list too.
>
> Anton Gerasimov [2016-09-20 10:22 +0
