[systemd-devel] systemd-shutdown static linking

[Colin Guthrie]

'Twas brillig, and Ross Lagerwall at 11/06/13 08:19 did gyre and gimble:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 08:30:40PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> Hmm, this is certainly weird. normally -.mount should not have any such
>> conflicts. I really wonder where you got those from... What is the
>> contents of /run/systemd/generator/-.mount for you?
>>
> 
> AFAICT, mount_load_proc_self_mountinfo is called early in the boot
> process and it calls mount_add_one for each filesystem in
> /proc/self/mounts, including /.
> If a unit does not exist already, a new unit is created and
> the following lines are called (in mount_add_one):
> 
> r = unit_add_dependency_by_name(u, UNIT_BEFORE, SPECIAL_LOCAL_FS_TARGET, NULL, true);
> if (r < 0)
>         goto fail;
> 
> r = unit_add_dependency_by_name(u, UNIT_CONFLICTS, SPECIAL_UMOUNT_TARGET, NULL, true);
> if (r < 0)
>         goto fail;
> 
> While it would be easy to make the conflicts line above conditional on
> the mount point not being /, I'm not sure how this interacts with
> mount_load which fills in a whole bunch of stuff and
> mount_add_default_dependencies which adds a conflict with umount.target
> so long as the mount point is not /.

Without reading the code etc., I'm running systemd with that commit
(v204) and I don't get any conflicts for my -.mount unit...

So it seems that code is not run for me for whatever reason.

After a very quick glance at the code, it could just be that the unit
already exists as it's created earlier and thus this bit of the code for
-.mount is simply not run?

Col


-- 

Colin Guthrie
gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie
http://colin.guthr.ie/

Day Job:
  Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/
Open Source:
  Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/
  PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/
  Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/