[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] initscripts changes
Jan de Groot
jan at jgc.homeip.net
Mon Apr 7 02:35:43 EDT 2008
On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 00:24 +0200, RedShift wrote:
> Thomas Bächler wrote:
> > RedShift schrieb:
> >> Thomas Bächler wrote:
> >>> I am hacking initscripts and can't quite decide on two issues:
> >>> 1) I'd like to hardcode /dev/pts/ mounting in rc.sysinit.
> >> What's wrong with putting that in fstab? What if I don't want to have
> >> that mounted? So instead of modified fstab I'd have to mess with
> >> rc.sysinit everytime the initscripts get upgraded? This is the same
> >> discussion as with moving lo to rc.sysinit instead of leaving it in
> >> rc.conf. Uterly pointless.
> > The point is, everyone needs it mounted. Your system will be completely
> > useless without devpts (as it is without the lo interface).
> > However, I know your opinion on these issues. Are there any rational
> > reasons not to hardcode devpts?
> Yes. It's not logical. fstab was made for mounting filesystems, why even consider moving it to rc.sysinit? It's not because it makes the system unusable without it, that it should be moved to rc.sysinit. Why the change anyway? What's the benefit? Now we're going to see "Heeey stuff's being mounted that's not in fstab? wtf?". This change is just plain irrational, fstab was _specifically made_ for mounting filesystems. If you're going to hardcode stuff like that you might as well throw away fstab.
/proc and /sys are already hardcoded. About your system being broken
without these filesystems mounted:
- SSH (both server and client) won't work without devpts mounted
- None of the virtual X terminal things will work without devpts mounted
One sidenote though: I don't think users will break their system,
the /dev/shm and /dev/pts mounts are in fstab during setup and I think
most people don't remove them. I haven't seen bugs about "hey my system
doesn't boot, but when I add these lines to /etc/fstab it works"
More information about the arch-general