1 |
All, |
2 |
|
3 |
I have been looking over this bug for some time attempting to find a |
4 |
good solution [1]. |
5 |
|
6 |
The original proposal is to add a "want" dependency which would work |
7 |
like "need" but would not fail if the services wanted did not start [2]. |
8 |
|
9 |
I agree that the "want" dependency is a valid feature request. However, I |
10 |
believe there is a better way to handle the issue in the original bug. |
11 |
Basically, I want to follow the suggestion in this bug instead [3]. |
12 |
|
13 |
My concern about the original proposal is that it will make netmount try |
14 |
to start all daemons that handle file systems, whether or not they are |
15 |
actually necessary. |
16 |
|
17 |
The proposal in [3], on the other hand, is to create a mount script that |
18 |
works like netifrc. It would mount a single file system, which would be |
19 |
determined by the link it was called from, much like how netifrc |
20 |
determines which interface to work on. |
21 |
|
22 |
Some of the advantages of this approach are listed in the bug. Here are |
23 |
a few more I can think of. |
24 |
|
25 |
- it will eliminate some of our incompatibilities with busybox [4] [5]. |
26 |
|
27 |
- It will give us honest reports of success or failure with regard to |
28 |
mounting file systems (netmount and localmount can't do that). |
29 |
|
30 |
- Currently, we have to skip over certain file systems that we can't |
31 |
unmount during shutdown. With the new approach, if the mount script |
32 |
mounts a file system during boot, it will be able to unmount the same |
33 |
filesystem during shutdown, so that will eliminate more complexity in |
34 |
our mount/unmount handling. |
35 |
|
36 |
The one down side of the new approach is the migration away from |
37 |
netmount and localmount. I I will need to keep them as wrappers |
38 |
for a release or two so we can fix all of our other services that |
39 |
have dependencies on them. |
40 |
|
41 |
I'll also work on making the transition as smooth as possible for our |
42 |
users. I believe I'll be able to set up the initial symlinks for the |
43 |
multiplexed mount script based on fstab contents automatically, but I'm |
44 |
not sure about how much more automation I'll be able to do. I will |
45 |
automate more as I come across ways to do so, and I am open to |
46 |
suggestions for how to do so. |
47 |
|
48 |
Let me know what you think. |
49 |
|
50 |
William |
51 |
|
52 |
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=537996 |
53 |
[2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=406021 |
54 |
[3] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=426944 |
55 |
[4] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=468600 |
56 |
[5] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=468604 |