On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat ([email protected]) wrote: > You really don't want to fsck a tmpfs, even if passno is non-null (it > was causing many issue, forcing system to go to emergency).
Hmm, I wonder if this is the right fix. I wonder what fsck -a does if it finds a passno != 0 for an entry where /sbin/fsck.xxx. If that fails on it we should probably do so too. If it silently ignores passno != 0 where the fsck is missing then we probably should implement a similar logic. However doing an explicit check for tmpfs sounds wrong to me: there are other fs where fsck makes little sense, and we would have to either check them all or none? > >From cca125c2758b48ba8f1afdc4b5751b104f0bd809 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Frederic Crozat <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 15:36:57 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] mount: do not try to fsck tmpfs mountpoint with non-null > passno. > > --- > src/mount.c | 1 + > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/mount.c b/src/mount.c > index ef953f0..5da4047 100644 > --- a/src/mount.c > +++ b/src/mount.c > @@ -434,6 +434,7 @@ static int mount_add_device_links(Mount *m) { > > if (p->passno > 0 && > !mount_is_bind(p) && > + !streq(p->fstype,"tmpfs") && > UNIT(m)->meta.manager->running_as == MANAGER_SYSTEM && > !path_equal(m->where, "/")) { > char *name; > _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
