| 1 |
William Hubbs posted on Thu, 06 Aug 2015 16:36:49 -0500 as excerpted: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Also, I want to talk more about netmount and localmount failing. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> If netmount and localmount are set up to fail if one of the file systems |
| 6 |
> they mount fails (which is what other init systems out there do), the |
| 7 |
> sys admin can control whether the mount -a command cares about the |
| 8 |
> status of specific file systems by adding nofail to the mount options in |
| 9 |
> fstab. By default it would care, but if you add nofail to the mount |
| 10 |
> options, you would affectively tell mount -a to not be concerned about |
| 11 |
> whether the mount succeeds or not. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
[As my previous replies were concerned with this and suggested more |
| 14 |
complicated solutions...] |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I like it. =:^) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
The nofail option is mount/fstab native, so it's "the proper way(tm)" and |
| 19 |
already documented at their level. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
The one catch is that since it's a change from current localmount/netmount |
| 22 |
behavior, the upgrade guide should point it out, and a news item pointing |
| 23 |
it out is effectively mandatory. In the upgrade guide (presumably on the |
| 24 |
wiki), I'd make it warning level, making it stand out. Similarly, in the |
| 25 |
news item, I'd consider making it a separate paragraph, introduced with |
| 26 |
*** WARNING *** or similar. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 30 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 31 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives