[systemd-devel] Stricter handling of failing mounts during boot under systemd - crap idea !

[Karel Zak]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 11:24:17PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Also, again, "nofail" predates systemd: you should have used it for
> your usecase even in sysvinit. If you so will, then the old setup was
> already borked for you, even though admittedly the effect was less
> fatal.

Note that "nofail" has been originally introduced for fsck and 
 
   mount -a

(used by initscripts) has never been sensitive to "nofail". The mount
-a is very optimistic and it fails on fatal errors like ENOMEM only
and everything else is ignored. It means with sysvinit you do not 
need "nofail". So for users who upgrade from sysvinit to systemd 
it seems like a regression.

Anyway, it does not mean that systemd "nofail" concept is wrong.

The original mount -a solution is fragile and IMHO it is better to have
explicit system setting in your fstab to distinguish between important
and unimportant filesystems.

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak at redhat.com>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com