From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maarten Vanraes Subject: Re: patches Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:18:28 +0200 Message-ID: <201007211718.28574.maarten.vanraes@gmail.com> References: <201007140205.35944.maarten.vanraes@gmail.com> <4C46DAF1.1090603@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=++7Kp3kdtFa9UsE9rswr8i3J5XqU/pFFmyRqITTGW/c=; b=YHflh8Jxu/8A6JvoIg1VfR3UqRC4w3b9R8QyiEtJfHVfAyMjGRjeiBnHBG+zOnLwE6 JcL1Hd07+Mky+zMiSgUoilY47dBCLgsD4jvGgfpTMsIl0RKU/KC0fAW77GTm59zT+VOW 3Vt4FsiKeLzlPkc31Xnj+QD/JqI93uiKm7MnA= In-Reply-To: <4C46DAF1.1090603-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: initramfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" To: initramfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Cc: Harald Hoyer Op woensdag 21 juli 2010 13:33:05 schreef Harald Hoyer: > On 07/14/2010 02:05 AM, Maarten Vanraes wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Here are some patches, some that were used as patches in the mandriva > > builds, and a first one from me, to fix nfs hostonly on chrooted > > installs. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Maarten Vanraes > > -[ "$1" = "-h" ] && ! egrep -q '/ nfs[34 ]' /proc/mounts && exit 1 > +[ "$1" = "-h" ] && ! egrep -q '\s/\s+nfs[34]?\s' /etc/fstab && exit 1 > > Hmm, I think "hostonly" should be really "hostonly", so the check is valid. > > You can always force the addition of nfs, if you are building a special > image for an NFS client. Or just boot with the generic (non-hostonly) one, > and build the hostonly one on the client. > i see what you mean, but i beg to differ. this thing is not really about nfs, it's about building an initrd on a chroot. if you're building initrd on a chroot, it's always a hostonly, in fact, only distros ship generic initrds. and even that's not always true. this fix has no consequences whatsoever in any case, except that it checks fstab instead of /proc/mounts. which means if you adjust your fstab, because you're going to run it elsewhere. I was planning on checking everywhere and trying to reduce the dependencies on /proc and /sys, IF it works the same everywhere without any consequences (just like this here). Also, if you look at it; not having / mounted as an nfs WILL disable the use of this module entirely and thus all the root=nfs stuff will fail. What do you think?