On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 07:43:00PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 24.03.14 17:48, Lennart Poettering ([email protected]) wrote: > To me it really appears as if "_netdev" is the right thing to use here, > and we really should advertise its use for cases like this, and close > the bug as WONTFIX or NOTABUG... > > I mean, the fact that we imply _netdev behaviour with nfs, and so on is > mostly to be compatibile with old fstabs. But given that glusterfs is > already documented explicitly to require _netdev, like for example here: > > http://gluster.org/community/documentation/index.php/Gluster_3.1:_Automatically_Mounting_Volumes > > And given that we really shouldn't attempt to add every possible network > fs in the world to our list I think we shouldn't add this at all here. OTOH, requiring _netdev seems rather user-unfriendly. I think the failure mode is rather unpleasant: everything seems to work, but at shutdown (sometimes) the fs doesn't get unmounted.
I wouldn't mind adding "all" network filesystems to the list: we probably already have most of them, and it's not like new ones show up every week. Actually removing the "fuse." prefix before the check also seems trivial. I think the patch should be merged. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
