On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Stef Bon <stef...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/4/29 Nikolaus Rath <nikol...@rath.org>: > > Hello, > > > > I am struggling to come up with the correct way to define a unit > > configuration for a FUSE based network file system. > > > > Generally, the file system needs to be mounted and unmounted with its > > own programs (rather than with mount and umount). The main reason for > > the custom umount command, however, is that it uses some /proc based > > hacks to block until the mount process has actually exited (this may > > take quite some time even after the mountpoint has been freed, because > > cached data is may still be transferred over the network). > > > > Things I am confused about: > > > > Is there a way to express this in a .mount unit, or do I need to declare > > this as a more general .service? > > Hi, > > the way I see it is that FUSE filesystems are not just like any other > mount, more a program which happens to be a filesystem. > > So I think it's the best choice to handle it like a "normal" program, > and make use of a pidfile, which systemd can watch (or make use of a > dbus service, but that's probably not the case). > > I'm going to leave it in the middle as to what the best method is, but, with little trouble I made a fuse mount unit myself, and it seems to work correctly. It needs 2 parts:
- the mount unit. This looks exactly like every other mount unit, except, the filetype is now something special. In my case, I have "Type=fuse.libsqlfs" - a /sbin/mount.fuse.libsqlfs wrapper script or executable. mount itself doesn't know any filesystems, but it calls helpers for the unknown ones. The helper for libsqlfs merely exec's libsqlfs_mount (the daemon providing the fuse fs) with the right parameters, and in my case, I threw a modprobe fuse in there as well. unmounting seems to work fine. Cheers, Auke
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel