On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:05:12AM +0900, Tom Gundersen wrote: > On Mar 16, 2013 10:57 AM, "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 05:06:01PM +0900, Tom Gundersen wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 3:41 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > From: Harald Hoyer <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Instead of using local-fs*.target in the initrd, use root-fs.target > for > > > > sysroot.mount and initrd-fs.target for /sysroot/usr and friends. > > > > > > > > Using local-fs.target would mean to carry over the activated > > > > local-fs.target to the isolated initrd-switch-root.target and thus in > > > > the real root. Having local-fs.target already active after > > > > deserialization causes ordering problems with the real root services > and > > > > targets. > > > > > > > > We better isolate to targets for initrd-switch-root.target, which are > > > > only available in the initrd. > > > > > > Looks good. > > > > > > This means that we should probably stop reusing units at all in the > > > initramfs. In some cases I guess it works (udev/journal), but perhaps > > > we should avoid it also there for consistency? > > > > > > In particular any storage daemons will need initrd-specific versions > > > which are ordered against these new targets rather than > > > local-fs.target. I don't see a problem with this, just something we > > > need to be aware of. > > Sorry fot the belated comment, but isn't it possible to exploit the > > fact that dependencies on non-existent unints are ignored and use > > something like: > > > > WantedBy=local-fs.target initrd-fs.target > > Before=local-fs.target initrd-fs.target > > > > which should work both in the initrd and on the real system? > > > > Zbyszek > > Yes, that would work. As long as we don't mind the same unit being possibly > activated twice: once in the real root and once in the init rd. I guess in > general it would cause similar problems as what this was meant to solve? I think that for units the situation is different than for targets. Let's say that the unit is lvm-monitor.target... Would it matter if it was active in the initramfs and then in the real root? I suppose that the unit configuration would be very similar and it wouldn't matter.
Zbyszek _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
