[systemd-devel] [PATCH 0/3] using firstboot and sysusers to construct an initramfs

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 09:09:54PM +0300, Ivan Shapovalov wrote:
> On 2015-02-26 at 02:53 +0300, Ivan Shapovalov wrote:
> > On 2015-02-26 at 02:46 +0300, Ivan Shapovalov wrote:
> > > Hi there.
> > > 
> > > These patches allow using firstboot and sysusers together to construct an
> > > initramfs with a fully functional emergency.service and rescue.service.
> > > 
> > > Moreover, they allow to build a "clean" passwd for the initramfs and don't
> > > resort to copying it from the host system (as it has been done in Arch's
> > > mkinitcpio).
> > > 
> > > The first one allows sysusers to take configuration from the real root
> > > but to apply it to a specified alternate root.
> > > 
> > > The next two patches fix an apparent integration problem between firstboot
> > > and sysusers, as previously described here:
> > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-February/028355.html
> > > 
> > > All in all, with this series I'm able to do a simple
> > > 
> > > 	systemd-firstboot --root="$BUILDROOT" --root-password=""
> > > 	systemd-sysusers --dest-root="$BUILDROOT"
> > > 
> > > and, after adding respective units and /sbin/sulogin to the initramfs,
> > > to use "rd.systemd.unit=rescue.target" as a complete alternative to pre-systemd
> > > arch-specific "break=premount" kernel parameter.
> > >
> > > [...]
> > 
> > Forgot to add Dave Reisner to Cc:.
> > 
> > Dave, what do you think about all this? If this is a bad idea, then I'm
> > open for suggestions.
> > I just miss these "break=..." from the pre-systemd era.
> > 
> 
> Anyone?
2/3 and 3/3 look fine. For 1/3 I was wondering if it wouldn't be simpler
to simply copy the sysuser files into the tree. The semantics are then
clear. But right now, if there are sysuser files in the source root, and
in the destination root, it becomes unclear how to sort and merge them.

Zbyszek