[ Oops, resending to include the source-changes-d list. ]
[ Sorry for the double-up for the original recipients. ]
Hi Alexander, folks,
Sorry for chiming in a bit late on this.
I'm running with a complete ZFS-only setup with no legacy mounts. This
is my basic ZFS layout (leaving out a few mounts that don't add any more
value to this discussion):
NAME MOUNTPOINT
pool0 /pool0
pool0/ROOT none
pool0/ROOT/default /
pool0/home /home
pool0/home/simonb /home/simonb
pool0/usr /usr
pool0/usr/obj /usr/obj
pool0/usr/pkg /usr/pkg
pool0/var /var
pool0/var/crash /var/crash
pool0/var/log /var/log
pool0/var/mail /var/mail
pool0/var/tmp /var/tmp
and I then have this grot in my mountcritlocal:
# XXXXXX
zfs mount pool0/var
zfs mount pool0/var/crash
zfs mount pool0/var/log
zfs mount pool0/var/mail
zfs mount pool0/var/tmp
I have been trying to think of better solutions to this before you added
this new critical_filesystems_zfs rc.conf variable. One idea was to add
a user defined property (eg "netbsd:mountcrit=yes") and use that in a
similar way to how you implemented mount_critical_filesystems_zfs . Then
another idea hit me.
Why don't we just mount all the ZFS filesystems in mountcritlocal? I
can't think of any negative reasons for not mounting all non-legacy
mountable ZFS filesystems early in the boot process. This would be as
simple as moving this chunk from mountall to mountcritlocal:
# Mount ZFS filesystems first because fstab
# may try and null mount paths on ZFS.
if checkyesno zfs; then
zfs mount -a
zfs share -a
fi
and the unmount stuff from mountall to a new mountcritlocal_stop
function.
For people using critical early legacy mounts, they can still be added
via critical_filesystems_local as that looks up via /etc/fstab (right?
I haven't tested this).
Anyone see a reason for not using this much simpler approach to
having ZFS filesystems available? I don't think we'd need to keep
critical_filesystems_zfs if we change mountcritlocal as I suggest, as
that explicitly only deals with non-legacy filesystems.
Cheers,
Simon.
