On 20/11/14 19:06, Noel Torres wrote:
> On Thursday, 20 de November de 2014 17:53:27 Marco d'Itri escribió:
>> On Nov 20, Sam Hartman <hartm...@debian.org> wrote:
>>> The first issue (fstab now fatally blocks boot) is something the systemd
>>> maintainers have considered (as I understand it) and rejected.
>>
>> The behaviour of systemd will not be changed, but I have plans to add
>> a fstab sanity check to preinst.
>
> Just for my sanity of mind. Is this referring to entries in fstab that have
> the auto option (either directly or via defaults)?
Yes, I'm pretty sure this is referring to entries in fstab that do not
have the noauto and/or nofail options.
systemd tries to mount each filesystem listed in fstab that does not
have noauto. If one of them fails, it checks for the nofail option; if
given, it carries on regardless and hopes for the best. If nofail was
not given, it considers the failure-to-mount to be potentially serious
breakage, and drops into an emergency shell.
noauto is appropriate for detachable/removable media that are not
normally present. The other option for such media is to leave them out
of fstab altogether, and use something like udisks to mount them
on-demand: that's what you'd typically do in GNOME or KDE or whatever.
nofail is appropriate for media that are normally present, but not
important enough to make the boot fail entirely; if you mount
non-essential data directories via NFS then maybe that should be nofail?
S
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/546e52a1.2080...@debian.org
