On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 07:48:16PM +0000, Brian wrote: > On Thu 11 Dec 2014 at 14:02:52 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > > > On 12/11/2014 1:23 PM, Brian wrote: > > > > > > For less work to set up than the previous method you want to take a look > > > at > > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799574 > > > > > > > To which Lennart responded that is not a good idea. > > Who am I to argue with a super-coder's views. :) I would look at it this > way: > > He says > > If an fsck is started after boot is complete we really shouldn't try to > take posession of /dev/tty1 again, since X11 or a getty might run on it, > and things would get very confused if we'd try to read input from that.
There's a solution to this. Stopping fsck is basically a similar task to mounting a crypto disk - inasmuch as you want to drop out of the parallel boot mode (so, if fsck is necessary, all current start-tasks (which don't depend on this disk) should be allowed to complete) and allow interaction with the operator. Isn't this what plymouth is for? As I understand it, Plymouth allows interaction with the operator even if the task is running in parallel and is "backgrounded" somewhere. If the fsck happens once plymouth has completed, then I think it's probably safe to assume that multi-user mode is available. In which case, you can simply allow for "systemctl stop Some-Mount-Task" to safely terminate fsck. > > but being pragmatic, if you applied the suggested change, tested and > found no confusion taking place then keep it. > > I'm not completely happy with that approach but if it works, it works. > > I'd like to suggest 'tune2fs -c -1 /dev/sdaX' and running an fsck when > *you* decide but the heavens could fall in. :) > > > >> I often give presentations with my notebook. If I'm lucky, I get 10-15 > > >> minutes to set up. If I'm not, less than 5 minutes (i.e. another > > >> presenter ahead of me). I use Linux whenever possible, but since my > > >> time slot is limited, I can't wait for fsck to complete. > > > > > > Your type of situation is well understood and there is sympathy for it. > > > > I appreciate that - but unfortunately, sympathy doesn't solve the problem :) > > But it does get you responses. > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: > https://lists.debian.org/11122014192651.c5b5a6ea0...@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
