-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 29/09/15 11:10 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 29/09/15 10:52 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> On 29/09/2015 16:29, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>>> On 28/09/15 06:58 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>>> Also, we are dropping the use of the -O switch for 
>>>> mount/umount -a. This is being dropped because it is 
>>>> util-linux specific and not compatible with busybox.
>>> 
>>> Does this have any actual end-user impact?  AFAIK, using the 
>>> -O switch was 'just added' by us originally (i think to
>>> reduce the explicit listing of the different fs types or
>>> otherwise simplify the init script code) right?  I'm just
>>> wondering if this paragraph is actually necessary or not..
> 
>> As a user, that para in the news makes me ask "how does this 
>> affect me?". I have to go read man pages and init scripts to
>> find out.
> 
>> Perhaps this:
> 
>> Also, we are dropping the use of the -O switch for
>> mount/umount -a, because it is util-linux specific and not
>> compatible with busybox. This only affects mounts with
>> "_netdev" listed under options in /etc/fstab. Such systems
>> should use "noauto" and/or "nofail" as described above.
> 
> 
> Exactly my thoughts.  We used -O _netdev within the 'netmount' 
> script to identify which fstab entries are network mounts.  But
> we did it a different way prior to using -O _netdev.  And since
> this isn't actually related in any way to something end-users can
> set in fstab (it has to do with the filesystem type itself) I
> don't see the point in worrying end-users about it.
> 
> I suppose it's worthwhile to note to busybox users that they no 
> longer have to use alternate means of netmounting, as 'netmount' 
> will now work on busybox...?
> 
> Perhaps: " Also, we are dropping the use of the -O switch for
> mount/umount -a, to ensure the localmount and netmount scripts
> are compatible with busybox mount.  If your system uses busybox
> mount please migrate any custom workarounds you may have to the
> openrc localmount/netmount services. "
> 

PS - i still think we should just cut it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iF4EAREIAAYFAlYKqoUACgkQAJxUfCtlWe1ijwEAopUzcU8s5btLyojGnoMFRKsR
ecQlbJrTzfPTQhrtzsMA/2pZuBCW8cELoE6Wef10i7ZeZbvxiFAzSHaWKVjwboMk
=nrvu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to