mountlate being too mount-happy

[Lawrence K. Chen, P.Eng.]

----- Original Message -----
> On 22 January 2013 21:30, Chris Rees <utisoft at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 22 January 2013 21:16, Hiroki Sato <hrs at freebsd.org> wrote:
> >> Chris Rees <utisoft at gmail.com> wrote
> >>   in
> >>   <CADLo83_ACAtUvqZYmv4A9Os9rTtxxdLK8e6n6YSrYhYJbiRk-w at mail.gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> ut> [dragging it up again!]
> >> ut>
> >> ut> On 18 November 2012 14:28, Chris Rees <utisoft at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> ut> > On 18 November 2012 06:09, Hiroki Sato <hrs at freebsd.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> ut> >> Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik at gmail.com> wrote
> >> ut> >> in <20121118002245.GB15055 at dft-labs.eu>:
> >> ut> >>
> >> ut> >> mj> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 07:43:25AM +0900, Hiroki Sato
> >> wrote:
> >> ut> >> mj> > Chris Rees <utisoft at gmail.com> wrote
> >> ut> >> mj> > in <
> >> ut>
> >> CADLo839wqzAPenuQDOVpQ74yjCMkPQNceKpvs_N9XNwMLrkC1A at mail.gmail.com>:
> >> ut> >> mj> >
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut> On 2 November 2012 14:21, Eitan Adler
> >> <lists at eitanadler.com>
> >> ut> wrote:
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut> > On 2 November 2012 09:56, Chris Rees
> >> <utisoft at gmail.com>
> >> ut> wrote:
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut> >> I'll take a look.
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut> >
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut> > untested:
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut>
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut> Based on Eitan's patch, I've tested this one, and
> >> documented
> >> ut> it in mount(8) too:
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut>
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut>
> >> http://www.bayofrum.net/~crees/patches/mountonlylate.diff
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut>
> >> ut> >> mj> > ut> Does anyone have any suggestions/objections/urge
> >> to approve it?
> >> ut> >> mj> >
> >> ut> >> mj> > Is the original problem due to backgrounding of NFS
> >> mount only? If
> >> ut> >> mj> > so, implementing prevention of duplicate invocation
> >> into mount(8)
> >> ut> >> mj> > would be more reasonable, I think.
> >> ut> >> mj> >
> >> ut> >> mj>
> >> ut> >> mj> We have 2 distinct scripts that try to mount same set
> >> of filesystems.
> >> ut> >> mj> I think this is the real bug here and proposed patches
> >> makes it go
> >> ut> away in
> >> ut> >> mj> an IMHO acceptable way.
> >> ut> >>
> >> ut> >> I just wanted to make sure if the case is limited to
> >> background NFS
> >> ut> >> mount or not.
> >> ut> >>
> >> ut> >> rc.d/mountlate just tries to mount the filesystems that are
> >> not
> >> ut> >> mounted yet at that time in addition to the "late" ones,
> >> not always
> >> ut> >> to mount the same set twice. If it is a bug, it is better
> >> to simply
> >> ut> >> fix -l to exclude not-yet-mounted ones without "late"
> >> keyword than
> >> ut> >> adding another option.
> >> ut> >
> >> ut> > I don't think it's a bug as such-- -l option is clearly
> >> labelled in
> >> ut> > the manpage (emphasis mine):
> >> ut> >
> >> ut> > When used in conjunction with the -a option, *also* mount
> >> those
> >> ut> > file systems which are marked as ``late''.
> >> ut> >
> >> ut> > I think that for POLA and to avoid changing behaviour of an
> >> option
> >> ut> > that's been there a long time we need the -L option.
> >> ut> >
> >> ut> > I disagree with Mateusz here-- split operations in rc makes
> >> two
> >> ut> > scripts necessary; mount and mountlate are two separate
> >> operations,
> >> ut> > done at different times.
> >> ut>
> >> ut> Hiroki-san, do you still believe that changing the behaviour
> >> of -l is the
> >> ut> correct way to go, rather than add a -L option for only late
> >> filesystems?
> >> ut> (mount -la currently mounts *all* filesystems, you suggested
> >> to change to
> >> ut> just late).
> >> ut>
> >> ut> I'd like to fix this, but I want to make sure you're happy
> >> with the
> >> ut> solution.
> >>
> >>  Sorry for being unresponsive.  Can you give me a couple of days
> >>  to
> >>  double-check the behavior?
> >
> > That'd be fantastic, thank you.
> >
> 
> Ping?
> 
> :)
> 
> Chris

Hmmm, I forgot about this annoyance....had two problems with mountlate....it runs too early (only like a couple of rc scripts after the first mount) and the nfs background issue.

I mount nfs filesystems from a VM on my FreeBSD system, so mountlate needs to come sufficiently after the VM starts.  Making the VM startup be "BEFORE: mountlate" caused some other problem that I forget.  Now that I think of it, it wonder if there's something that depends on /compat/linux/proc and/or /compat/linux/sys...but doesn't specify it in its rc script.

And, using nfs background would cause them to happen twice.

I ended up taking the nfs mounts out of fstab and doing the nfs background mounts in rc.local.

Lawrence