From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] gnu: Separate util-linux into three packages. Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 11:46:01 +0100 Message-ID: <87inrpdnrq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1478812461-18483-1-git-send-email-jmd@gnu.org> <87wpg8lpfc.fsf@gnu.org> <20161112152808.GA21994@jocasta.intra> <20161112170948.GA23070@jocasta.intra> <874m3cjoku.fsf@gnu.org> <20161113082110.GA6656@jocasta.intra> <877f87io95.fsf@gnu.org> <20161113140647.GA10548@jocasta.intra> <87h97abdel.fsf@gnu.org> <20161114174628.GA32053@jocasta.intra> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37924) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c6bFf-0005kK-T0 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 05:46:08 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c6bFb-0000TK-W8 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 05:46:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20161114174628.GA32053@jocasta.intra> (John Darrington's message of "Mon, 14 Nov 2016 18:46:28 +0100") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: John Darrington Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org John Darrington skribis: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 10:48:18AM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote: > John Darrington skribis: > > > GuixSD doesn???t use the ???mount??? command to mount file sy= stems so that > > shouldn???t have any influence. > > > > What does it use instead? >=20=20=20=20=20=20 > The ???mount??? system call; see (gnu build file-systems). > > I confess, I have not really thought about this before. But supposing som= ebody has in their /etc/config.scm: > > (file-systems=20 > (cons* > (file-system > (device "my-root") > (title 'label) > (mount-point "/") > (type "ext4")) > (file-system > (device "fileserver.example.com:/home") > (title 'device) > (mount-point "/home") > (type "nfs4")) > %base-file-systems)) > > Would the /home filesystem then get mounted on boot? Maybe not. :-) The man page for mount(2) says: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Values for the filesystemtype argument supported by the kernel are listed in /proc/filesystems (e.g., "btrfs", "ext4", "jfs", "xfs", "vfat", "fuse", "tmpfs", "cgroup", "proc", "mqueue", "nfs", "cifs", "iso9660"). Further types may become available when the appropriate modules are loaded. --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- I don=E2=80=99t know what happens with NFS, you=E2=80=99ll have to tell us. > > I'm irritated that util-linux has so many, completely unrelated th= ings in it. For example > > it contains the "mount", "cal" and "col" commands. Regardless o= f the NFS issues, I=20 > > suggest we consider separating it anyway, into several packages al= l deriving from the common > > source. >=20=20=20=20=20=20 > The strategy is to stick to what upstream does, in general, and I???= m not > convinced splitting would buy us much (in terms of disk usage, for > instance.) > > In general I think that is a sensible strategy. Splitting, would not buy= us anything=20 > in terms of disk space, but I think it would mean less rebuilding when so= me configure=20 > option needs to be changed. Yeah, but that=E2=80=99s probably not a significant improvement in terms of avoiding rebuilds. Ludo=E2=80=99.