Re: systemd requires "plymouth" on server? (was: Systemd: no error but "maintenance mode")
Hi,
thank you for your quick reply.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:38 AM, David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun 08 Jan 2017 at 15:56:36 (+0100), Steffen Dettmer wrote:
>> apparently is ignored and "1" is assumed instead, BUT systemd does not
>> call fsck! fsck parsed the line as intended (pass=0 -> no check), so
>> is all fine.
>
> Why would fsck parse /etc/fstab?
Because man page says so? Because fsck's job is to check fs?
Don't know what systemd interferes at all.
> man fstab in jessie is pretty long in the tooth (from the days of
> lenny) and might have some clarification of how systemd scans it,
> which does seem to differ from sysvinit's approach.
I'm looking at Jessie (Debian 8) man fsck. I found no refernce
to systemd. I think this is some compatiblity feature of systemd.
> How essential it was to read §5.6.1 in jessie's release notes!
Thanks for pointing this. Indeed. So no need to write a bug
report, already documented :)
I remember similar issues long time ago with messages like
"failed to mount the root file system, dropping an emergency
shell" or alike.
> I think they might usefully have added here a recommendation to
> check /etc/fstab thoroughly for non-compliance with the stricter
> behaviour of systemd. I got caught out by systemd's acting upon
> cruft that sysv happily ignored as redundant.
You cannot check everything everytime. Next time systemd
includes a kernel and you need to migrate boot options... SCNR :)
> A bug report would involve an explanation of exactly what you
> think the bug is, without the words "apparently", "probably",
> "assumed", "intended", "do things itself", etc.
I can explain what I see and wait I expect, but not be sure about
the cause. There are so many possible reasons why an error
message could be missing.
Or it is not a bug at all but a feature, to avoid irritating the emergency
shell users with too much technical details. I'm not familiar with
systemd, surely a source of problems. I just used it because I was
told using sysv on Debian 8 or other recent Linuxes caused more
difficulties. I'd rather keep it as simple as possible.
Steffen
Reply to: