raid5atemyhomework <raid5atemyhomew...@protonmail.com> writes: > Hi guix-devel, > > I had some questions on the big ZFS guix bugpatches a week ago, and > did not find any response, so I am back here pestering everyone.
Hello, thank you for working on ZFS for guix! > > [...] > There are two alternatives: > > * Go with what I already proposed which I think is more general-purpose and > cleaner (there is a separate service type that accepts symbols, and a > separate service type that accepts `<file-system>` records, and the latter > just extends the former). > * Don't make a separate service type, but now we need to add some kind of > `fstab?` field to `file-system` so that the ZFS shepherd service that mounts > ZFS file systems will not be included in the `/etc/fstab`. > > I think overall that having lots of tiny service types that are then > combined together fits the functional design of Guix better. So I > would strongly propose my original design rather than hacks on top of > `file-system-service-type`. Well, I think the 'file-system-service-type' should handle all file systems related configurations, but my opion is not strong. Waiting ludo to decide...
