On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Dave Reisner <d...@falconindy.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 01:40:32PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> >> On Tuesday 2013-09-10 02:41, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> >On Fri, 06.09.13 14:53, Robert Schiele (rschi...@gmail.com) wrote: >> > >> >One possibility might be to add a new extended mount option (i.e. as >> >listed in fstab's fourth column) that systemd >> >would interpret. i.e. "x-systemd.yesfsck" or so. That sounds much nicer, >> >since it would be naturally persistent, and per-mount point. >> > >> >Opinions? >> >> Loosely related: >> >> Mount options are a problem with mount helpers. If you have, for >> example, a FUSE mount marked with "nofail" so that your boot phase >> does not get interrupted if it fails, attempting to manually >> mount it later on always fails, because the FUSE program knows >> nothing about the systemd-specific "nofail" or "x-*". > > This should only be a problem if you directly use the FUSE mount helper. > If you instead invoke mount with -t fuse.$fusetype, then this isn't an > issue. mount(8) *does* understand these options and nicely strips them > out before invoking the specific mount helper for you.
Right, and nofail and x-* are proper mount(8) options, and are not systemd specific at all. Kay _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel