Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] #11662 - wic should mount /boot

[Ed Bartosh <ed.bartosh@linux.intel.com>]

On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 09:53:32AM +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-07-03 at 10:31 +0300, Ed Bartosh wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 08:34:30PM +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > then I don't see a need for any additional flags. Just
> > > don't use the features which result in a rootfs modification.
> > 
> > I also didn't see it till last message from Otavio. Now I do - they
> > don't want to change .wks files. They're using standard wks from
> > scripts/lib/wic/canned-wks or from standard layers and they don't want
> > to duplicate them when they don't want rootfs modifications.
> > 
> > It could be a valid reason to have --no-fstab-update option I think.
> > However, I'm still not 100% convinced I'm ok with this if nobody else
> > objects.
> 
> Okay, now I see what the purpose is.
> 
> I prefer a --no-fstab-update over a general --no-rootfs-update because
> for each case where wic would normally modify the rootfs, some other
> mechanism must be in place which makes that modification redundant (like
> using PARTUUID). Having separate parameters forces the developers to
> think about it. Just my 2 cents...
>

Tha makes sense to me.

From other point of view if the goal is to have rootfs unmodified
--no-rootfs-update would make it easier to achive. Moreover it will
guarantee that rootfs is unmodified even if wic introduces new
functionality that modifies rootfs.

--
Regards,
Ed