!PSmBFWNKoXmlQBzUQf:helsinki-systems.de

Stage 1 systemd

81 Members
systemd in NixOs's stage 1, replacing the current bash tooling https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/projects/5126 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
14 Feb 2023
@k900:0upti.meK900Outside of wrapping systemd18:10:18
@k900:0upti.meK900Which is just ew18:10:24
@k900:0upti.meK900I'm still hoping to see the day where we don't need to do that on nixos-wsl18:11:29
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowers ElvishJerricco: I've been thinking about submitting a PR to systemd to canonicalize source for bind mounts (specifically so that they can be canonicalized from /sysroot in initrd). It would prevent us needing to artificially prepend /sysroot to only bind mounts from the NixOS side when generating the fstab for systemd-based initrd, and based on the old systemd PR I linked, they seem receptive to merging that functionality (or at least they did a few years ago). Thoughts? 18:40:02
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgwell the awkward thing is that bind mounts aren't the only problem18:41:26
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowersYeah, was worried you were going to say that. We only handle it for bind mounts in NixOS though18:41:49
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgoverlayfs, for instance, has the directory options that would need the same treatment18:41:44
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowersI mean theoretically I could just make it do that for any mount if the source is a non-/dev and non-/sys path18:42:13
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgthis isn't to say we shouldn't improve bind mounts18:41:56
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowers * I mean theoretically I could just make it do that for any mount if the source is a non-/dev and non-/sys absolute path18:42:26
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgjust saying it's awkward18:42:02
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowers
In reply to @lily:lily.flowers
I mean theoretically I could just make it do that for any mount if the source is a non-/dev and non-/sys absolute path
(Idk if there are scenarios where that would also Do The Wrong Thing too though)
18:42:59
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgwell the overlayfs example has the problem in the mount options, not the device or mountpoint18:43:19
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowers
In reply to @elvishjerricco:matrix.org
overlayfs, for instance, has the directory options that would need the same treatment
Oh true, didn't even think about that. Hopefully people aren't doing that as an fs needed for boot though? Because we only generate for those needed for boot, right?
18:43:32
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowers
In reply to @elvishjerricco:matrix.org
overlayfs, for instance, has the directory options that would need the same treatment
* Oh true, didn't even think about that. Hopefully people aren't doing that as an fs needed for boot though? Because we only generate initrd fstab for those needed for boot, right?
18:43:46
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgi mean, go look at qemu-vm.nix :P18:43:50
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.org We currently do that 18:43:56
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowersOh, joy18:44:03
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowersI'm actually okay with that one staying special-cased tbh. I doubt someone would use it for anything other than having a writable nix store in a VM anyway18:45:02
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.org I mean the real answer is to have a Root= option for mount units (all units?) so that the mount syscall occurs in a chroot or something so that all the scenarios are taken care of 18:46:14
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.orgbut that sounds very annoying to validate18:46:43
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowersIdk, that makes way too much sense. Gotta make sure to pile on more and more hacks (/s)18:47:22
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.orglol18:47:39
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.org yea I wouldn't dare open a PR with that feature, but it does seem right 18:47:55
@lily:lily.flowers@lily:lily.flowers
In reply to @elvishjerricco:matrix.org
yea I wouldn't dare open a PR with that feature, but it does seem right
Yeah that's more systemd refactoring than I am certainly comfortable with, even though that seems objectively better. I'll see what upstream says about at least handling bind mounts for now though (I'll probably open it after their 253 release, when they'll be more able to look at it and my other PR)
19:47:06
15 Feb 2023
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.org

https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/26367#issuecomment-1430670880

jfc "we can't do a real fix because it's remotely possible that some people have an utterly insane configuration that would break"

04:52:58
@gdamjan:spodeli.org@gdamjan:spodeli.orgcalm down :)10:59:40
16 Feb 2023
@jkarlson:kapsi.fi@jkarlson:kapsi.fihibernation is a nightmare07:18:05
@jkarlson:kapsi.fi@jkarlson:kapsi.fifilesytems should really be used with nfs or something with hibernation07:18:53
@elvishjerricco:matrix.org@elvishjerricco:matrix.org Emil Thorsøe: hm? Why nfs? 07:19:43

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6