On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 20:18 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 29.06.15 16:19, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > >Who writes/maintains the code that parses "nofail" in /etc/fstab ? > > >Who writes/maintains the typical system boot code (whatever has replaced > > >rc.sysinit) ? > > > > > >I suspect the answer to both is the systemd maintainers, in which case > > >is this not the correct place to bitch about it ? > > > > util-linux ( see man mount ) is what provides the nofail option and I dont > > follow what you mean by getting the behaviour to modify it back to sensible > > since systemd does already do what is sensible to do and always has. > > Well, that's not the full story. systemd interprets nofail, and builds > on the semantics that util-linux defines, but expands on them. > > Hence, yes, we do take blame for the change of behaviour, but I am > sure it's the right thing to do.
I am not as "sure" at all. It either needs to be less radical, IE preserve the default not going into admin shell if mount fails or .... <yikes> ... be more radical, brings up networking/sshd with an admin console (if sshd is configured, as it often is) in parallel with local admin console .... Thanks, Jon _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel