-only))
;; (options "proto=tcp6,timeo=300,nolock")
(check? #f)
(mount-may-fail? #t)
(create-mount-point? #t))
--8<---cut here---end--->8---
I can use the the /etc/fstab manually with
mount /acct
> You could try invoking mount-file
Felix Lechner writes:
> > You could try invoking mount-file-system from (gnu build file-systems)
> > directly to try and narrow down what exactly is breaking.
> How would I go about doing that, please?
1. $ guix repl
2. Import the module with ,use (gnu build file-systems)
3. C
Hi Richard,
On Fri, Jun 07 2024, Richard Sent wrote:
> I did have to reboot
So did I. In fact, my issue is now that the file system fails to mount
on boot.
> You could try invoking mount-file-system from (gnu build file-systems)
> directly to try and narrow down what exactly is break
l work with my CIFS/SMB share, so I suspect
this is an NFS-specific problem. Curiously I did have to reboot after
adding the file-system entry, but it works after that.
You could try invoking mount-file-system from (gnu build file-systems)
directly to try and narrow down what exactly is breaki
Hi Richard,
On Tue, Apr 23 2024, Richard Sent wrote:
> I submitted a patch for what I'm thinking at
> https://issues.guix.gnu.org/70542.
I believe this stopped working for my NFS setup.
Kind regards
Felix
Dependencies adjusts the order of mounting file-systems /before/
provisioning 'file-systems, while requirements actually delays mounting
a file system until Shepherd services have started (by removing it as a
requirement for provisioning 'file-systems).
I think this distinction in behavior s
Hi!
Richard Sent skribis:
> Before hacking away at this myself, I'd like to get other people's
> thoughts on the best way to proceed. Do others agree that (file-system)
> entries should support networked devices? Should this be transparent
> depending on the type, or require explicit configurati
> P.S. The code above should read (requirements ...) in the plural.
inside shepherd there's a bit of anomaly, but it's called requirement in the
public API, and also in the guix side of the config; i.e. it's not plural.
--
• attila lendvai
• PGP: 963F 5D5F 45C7 DFCD 0A39
--
“Moderation in temp
Hi Richard,
On Tue, Apr 23 2024, Richard Sent wrote:
> I submitted a patch [..] at https://issues.guix.gnu.org/70542. If this
> winds up merged I believe your code could be rewritten [as]
>
> --8<---cut here---start->8---
> (file-system
>(device "wallace-se
n operating-system file-systems field and reusing the
existing code of file-system-shepherd-service in (gnu services base) and
mount-file-system in (gnu build file-system).
My comment on NFS support is more about how mount-file-system supports
mounting NFS file-system records, but the existin
Hi Richard,
On Mon, Apr 22 2024, Richard Sent wrote:
> NFS is allegedly supported
Someone once gave me this service [1] to mount a file-system declared
with (mount? #f). [2] It's been working ever since.
Kind regards
Felix
[1]
https://codeberg.org/lechner/system-config/src/commit/0131082ff0eb
Hi Guix!
I wanted to ask the Guix community for their thoughts on improving the
support for adding networked file systems to an operating-system
declaration.
For some context, I started tackling adding CIFS support to file-system
declarations, but I've hit a snag. CIFS is a networked file s
s well.
Sure, why not?
> This can be done by having the `dependency->shepherd-service-name'
> in (gnu services base) also accept matching against a symbol object.
>
> 2. Allow excluding some file-system objects from being dependencies
> of the `file-systems' shepherd
t matching against a symbol object.
2. Allow excluding some file-system objects from being dependencies
of the `file-systems' shepherd service.
This is to avoid a cycle scenario where a (NFS) mount requires
'networking (that depends on 'file-systems) which in turn requires
a
le-system record type
> =
>
> Guix currently envisions file systems to depend only on other file
> systems, but that restriction should perhaps be relaxed. In some
> cases, it may make sense to wait for any (shepherd) service,
of file-system record type
> ===
>
> Guix currently envisions file systems to depend only on other file
> systems, but that restriction should perhaps be relaxed. In some
> cases, it may make sense to wait for any (shepherd) service,
> i.e. not just for one
envisions file systems to depend only on other file
systems, but that restriction should perhaps be relaxed. In some
cases, it may make sense to wait for any (shepherd) service,
i.e. not just for ones that mount directories. These could be used to place a
dependency on kerberos, etc.
A prominent
Hello Mathieu!
Mathieu Othacehe skribis:
>> Thus I think it’s probably best to keep LUKS UUID lookup separate from
>> file system lookup.
>>
>> WDYT? Are there use cases in the installer where this is problematic?
>
> It makes sense and there are no particular need, so I reverted this
> commit
Hey Ludo!
> Thus I think it’s probably best to keep LUKS UUID lookup separate from
> file system lookup.
>
> WDYT? Are there use cases in the installer where this is problematic?
It makes sense and there are no particular need, so I reverted this
commit and replaced it by 488a0a8d6120ead3499ba
Hello!
guix-comm...@gnu.org skribis:
> commit fa358c557f130f393d8c7400ffa954f75112d09e
> Author: Mathieu Othacehe
> Date: Fri Dec 7 14:03:06 2018 +0900
>
> build: file-systems: Add luks to %partition-uuid-readers.
>
> * gnu/build/file-systems.scm (%partiti
Applied as b0377e58c30c399f9844a1607d677e525bb1d05f to master.
#f
(list->string (map integer->char bytes)
+(define null-terminated-latin1->string
+ (cut latin1->string <> zero?))
+
;;;
;;; Ext2 file systems.
@@ -194,6 +196,51 @@ if DEVICE does not contain a btrfs file system."
;;;
+;;; FAT32 file systems.
+;;;
David Craven skribis:
>> What’s wrong with using “fsck.extN” like we did before?
>
> fsck.extN is exactly the same binary as e2fsck when compiled
> statically. This reduces the e2fsck/static package to a third of it's
> previous size.
Oh I see.
I fixed the crux of the problem (hard links) in co
> What’s wrong with using “fsck.extN” like we did before?
fsck.extN is exactly the same binary as e2fsck when compiled
statically. This reduces the e2fsck/static package to a third of it's
previous size.
David
David Craven skribis:
> Updated patch, these patches now pass the basic, installed-os,
> btrfs-root-os and encrypted-root-os tests.
>
> [PATCH] file-systems: Refactor file-system predicates.
>
> * gnu/build/file-systems.scm (partition-field-reader,
> read-partition-fi
David Craven skribis:
> Also requires this patch:
>
> [PATCH] gnu: e2fsck/static: Only copy e2fsck.
>
> * gnu/packages/linux.scm (e2fsck/static)[arguments]: Only copy e2fsck.
> [synopsis, description]: Adjust accordingly.
Same question as in my other message, but otherwise no objections. :-)
Hi!
David Craven skribis:
> * gnu/build/file-systems.scm (check-file-system): Use file-system type
> specific checker.
> (check-ext2-file-system): New variable.
[...]
> +(define (check-ext2-file-system device)
> + "Return the health of an ext2 file system on DEVICE."
> + (match (status:e
Updated patch, these patches now pass the basic, installed-os,
btrfs-root-os and encrypted-root-os tests.
[PATCH] file-systems: Refactor file-system predicates.
* gnu/build/file-systems.scm (partition-field-reader,
read-partition-field, %partition-label-readers,
%partition-uuid-readers, read
Also requires this patch:
[PATCH] gnu: e2fsck/static: Only copy e2fsck.
* gnu/packages/linux.scm (e2fsck/static)[arguments]: Only copy e2fsck.
[synopsis, description]: Adjust accordingly.
---
gnu/packages/linux.scm | 23 ++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
Nope, everything seems good - the bug report is definitely due to not
updating guix since 4. Dez.
the basic test does not exercise the file-system detection logic
* gnu/build/file-systems.scm (check-file-system): Use file-system type
specific checker.
(check-ext2-file-system): New variable.
---
gnu/build/file-systems.scm | 55 +-
1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gnu/build/file-sy
* gnu/build/file-systems.scm (partition-field-reader,
read-partition-field, %partition-label-readers,
%partition-uuid-readers, read-partition-label, read-partition-uuid):
New variables.
(partition-predicate, partition-label-predicate,
partition-uuid-predicate, luks-partition-uuid-predicat
Marius Bakke skribis:
> Danny Milosavljevic writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> why not just use "fsck -t xxx" instead? It will filter out "-C" for
>> fscks which don't support it.
>
> I think pending a proper solution for handling fsck commands, offloading
> it to util-linux is a decent compromise. Ludo, WD
Danny Milosavljevic writes:
> Hi,
>
> why not just use "fsck -t xxx" instead? It will filter out "-C" for
> fscks which don't support it.
I think pending a proper solution for handling fsck commands, offloading
it to util-linux is a decent compromise. Ludo, WDYT?
signature.asc
Description: PGP
root-file-system (canonicalize-device-spec root)
- root-fs-type
+ root-fs-type root-fs-check-procedure
#:volatile-root? volatile-root?)
(mount "none" "/root" "tm
John Darrington skribis:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 10:05:15PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
> John Darrington skribis:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 02:59:09PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
> > > ???match???,
> > >
> > > Have another look: +
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 10:05:15PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
John Darrington skribis:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 02:59:09PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
> > ???match???,
> >
> > Have another look: +(let* ((host (match (string-split sour
John Darrington skribis:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 02:59:09PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
> > ???match???,
> >
> > Have another look: +(let* ((host (match (string-split source #\:)
> ((h _) h)))
>
> Right, but there are other occurrences of ???car??? for
>
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 02:59:09PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
> ???match???,
>
> Have another look: +(let* ((host (match (string-split source #\:)
((h _) h)))
Right, but there are other occurrences of ???car??? for ???getaddrinfo???.
:-)
But that occuranc
John Darrington skribis:
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 07:37:15PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
> John Darrington skribis:
>
> > * gnu/build/file-systems.scm (mount-file-system): Append target addr=
> when
> > mounting nfs filesystems.
>
> Looks like you forgot to a
On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 07:37:15PM +0100, Ludovic Court??s wrote:
John Darrington skribis:
> * gnu/build/file-systems.scm (mount-file-system): Append target addr=
when
> mounting nfs filesystems.
Looks like you forgot to address some of suggestions I made
(???
John Darrington skribis:
> * gnu/build/file-systems.scm (mount-file-system): Append target addr= when
> mounting nfs filesystems.
Looks like you forgot to address some of suggestions I made
(‘string-prefix?’, ‘match’, etc.) and left a question unanswered (port
number?):
https://lists.gnu.org/
* gnu/build/file-systems.scm (mount-file-system): Append target addr= when
mounting nfs filesystems.
---
gnu/build/file-systems.scm | 36 +---
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
ind
f3a398d4ab739ec2b48477502 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Andy Patterson
>>> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 22:10:01 -0500
>>> Subject: [PATCH] tests: Don't check file-systems in container tests.
>>>
>>> * tests/containers.scm ("call-with-container, mnt
son
>> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 22:10:01 -0500
>> Subject: [PATCH] tests: Don't check file-systems in container tests.
>>
>> * tests/containers.scm ("call-with-container, mnt namespace"): Don't
>> check file-system in 'call-with-container&#
77502 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > 2001 From: Andy Patterson
> > Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 22:10:01 -0500
> > Subject: [PATCH] tests: Don't check file-systems in container tests.
> >
> > * tests/containers.scm ("call-with-container, mnt namespace"): Don't
&
Hi,
Andy Patterson skribis:
> The containers test was hanging for me, and this patch fixed the
> problem.
[...]
> From 945ad44acf489b7f3a398d4ab739ec2b48477502 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Andy Patterson
> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 22:10:01 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH] tests
Hello,
The containers test was hanging for me, and this patch fixed the
problem.
--
Andy
From 945ad44acf489b7f3a398d4ab739ec2b48477502 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Andy Patterson
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 22:10:01 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] tests: Don't check file-systems in container
Hi,
why not just use "fsck -t xxx" instead? It will filter out "-C" for fscks which
don't support it.
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hey!
>
> Marius Bakke skribis:
>
>> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>>
>>> Marius Bakke skribis:
>>>
* gnu/build/file-systems.scm (check-file-system): Drop "-C" argument
from fsck for compatibility with other fscks.
>>>
>>> Oh so fsck.ext2 would no longer show any k
Hey!
Marius Bakke skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
>> Marius Bakke skribis:
>>
>>> * gnu/build/file-systems.scm (check-file-system): Drop "-C" argument
>>> from fsck for compatibility with other fscks.
>>
>> Oh so fsck.ext2 would no longer show any kind of progress report?
>> That’s annoyi
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Marius Bakke skribis:
>
>> * gnu/build/file-systems.scm (check-file-system): Drop "-C" argument
>> from fsck for compatibility with other fscks.
>
> Oh so fsck.ext2 would no longer show any kind of progress report?
> That’s annoying.
>
> Could we address it differently?
Marius Bakke skribis:
> * gnu/build/file-systems.scm (check-file-system): Drop "-C" argument
> from fsck for compatibility with other fscks.
Oh so fsck.ext2 would no longer show any kind of progress report?
That’s annoying.
Could we address it differently? Not sure how, though.
Thanks,
Ludo’.
* gnu/build/file-systems.scm (check-file-system): Drop "-C" argument
from fsck for compatibility with other fscks.
---
gnu/build/file-systems.scm | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
index bfc353a..30abe94 10064
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 04:36:55PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Leo Famulari skribis:
>
> > * gnu/system/examples/bare-bones.tmpl (file-systems): Change device
> > label.
> > * gnu/system/examples/desktop.tmpl (file-systems): Likewise.
>
> [...]
>
> >
Leo Famulari skribis:
> * gnu/system/examples/bare-bones.tmpl (file-systems): Change device
> label.
> * gnu/system/examples/desktop.tmpl (file-systems): Likewise.
[...]
> + ;; Assuming /dev/sdX is the target hard disk, and "my-root-partition" is
[...]
> + ;;
* gnu/system/examples/bare-bones.tmpl (file-systems): Change device
label.
* gnu/system/examples/desktop.tmpl (file-systems): Likewise.
---
gnu/system/examples/bare-bones.tmpl | 4 ++--
gnu/system/examples/desktop.tmpl| 6 +++---
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> "Thompson, David" skribis:
>
>> +(define (regular-file? file-name)
>> + "Return #t if FILE-NAME is a regular file."
>> + (eq? (stat:type (stat file-name)) 'regular))
>
> I see you
"Thompson, David" skribis:
> +(define (regular-file? file-name)
> + "Return #t if FILE-NAME is a regular file."
> + (eq? (stat:type (stat file-name)) 'regular))
I see you moved this procedure to (gnu build file-systems), which is
reasonable.
I wonder if it s
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 3:17 PM, David Thompson wrote:
> As I was working on my container implementation I noticed that
> 'mount-file-system' doesn't support bind mounting regular files because
> it assumes that all mount points are directories. This patch fixes
> that.
I pushed this.
- Dave
Thompson, David (2015-08-06 15:22 +0300) wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Alex Kost wrote:
>> Thompson, David (2015-08-02 15:51 +0300) wrote:
>>
>>> Ah, of course, I forgot about something: This patch triggers a
>>> rebuild of *everything* now! I guess it should be applied to
>>> core-u
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Alex Kost wrote:
> Thompson, David (2015-08-02 15:51 +0300) wrote:
>
>> Ah, of course, I forgot about something: This patch triggers a
>> rebuild of *everything* now! I guess it should be applied to
>> core-updates. Or, the first patch I submitted can be applied
Thompson, David (2015-08-02 15:51 +0300) wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Thompson, David
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Alex Kost wrote:
>>> David Thompson (2015-08-01 22:17 +0300) wrote:
>>>
diff --git a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
ind
On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 08:51:46AM -0400, Thompson, David wrote:
> Ah, of course, I forgot about something: This patch triggers a
> rebuild of *everything* now! I guess it should be applied to
> core-updates.
I think it would be better to wait until hydra is done building the
security updates Ma
On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Thompson, David
wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Alex Kost wrote:
>> David Thompson (2015-08-01 22:17 +0300) wrote:
>>
>>> diff --git a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
>>> index c58d23c..f0d6f70 100644
>>> --- a/gnu/build/file-system
b2413bd06b1e769edfbe4d170de41398015a67d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: David Thompson
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2015 13:43:33 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] build: file-systems: Allow for bind mounting regular files.
* guix/build/utils.scm (regular-file?): New procedure.
* gnu/build/file-systems.scm (mount-file-system
David Thompson (2015-08-01 22:17 +0300) wrote:
> diff --git a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
> index c58d23c..f0d6f70 100644
> --- a/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
> +++ b/gnu/build/file-systems.scm
> @@ -305,6 +305,10 @@ the following:
> fsck code device)
>
0 2001
From: David Thompson
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2015 13:43:33 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] build: file-systems: Allow for bind mounting regular files.
* gnu/build/file-systems.scm (regular-file?): New procedure.
(mount-file-system): Create a regular file instead of a directory when bind
mounting a regu
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> David Thompson skribis:
>
>> * gnu/system/file-systems.scm (%container-file-systems): New variable.
>
> [...]
>
>> +(define %container-file-systems
>
> Could you add a comment explaining how they differ fro
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> David Thompson skribis:
>
>> * gnu/system/linux-initrd.scm (file-system->spec): Move this...
>> * gnu/system/file-systems.scm: ... to here.
>
> OK
Pushed.
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> David Thompson skribis:
>
>> * gnu/system/vm.scm (, %store-mapping): Move from
>> here...
>> * gnu/system/file-systems.scm: ...to here.
>> * guix/scripts/system.scm: Import (gnu system file-systems).
>
> OK
Pushed.
David Thompson skribis:
> * gnu/system/file-systems.scm (%container-file-systems): New variable.
[...]
> +(define %container-file-systems
Could you add a comment explaining how they differ from
%base-file-systems and why it must be done this way?
Otherwise OK.
Ludo’.
David Thompson skribis:
> * gnu/system/linux-initrd.scm (file-system->spec): Move this...
> * gnu/system/file-systems.scm: ... to here.
OK
David Thompson skribis:
> * gnu/system/vm.scm (, %store-mapping): Move from here...
> * gnu/system/file-systems.scm: ...to here.
> * guix/scripts/system.scm: Import (gnu system file-systems).
OK
From: David Thompson
* gnu/system/file-systems.scm (%container-file-systems): New variable.
---
gnu/system/file-systems.scm | 30 ++
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gnu/system/file-systems.scm b/gnu/system/file-systems.scm
index b33f826..23998dd 100644
tem/file-systems.scm b/gnu/system/file-systems.scm
index cbaca88..b33f826 100644
--- a/gnu/system/file-systems.scm
+++ b/gnu/system/file-systems.scm
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
;;; along with GNU Guix. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
(define-module (gnu system file-systems)
+ #:use-modu
From: David Thompson
* gnu/system/vm.scm (, %store-mapping): Move from here...
* gnu/system/file-systems.scm: ...to here.
* guix/scripts/system.scm: Import (gnu system file-systems).
---
gnu/system/file-systems.scm | 32 +++-
gnu/system/vm.scm | 22
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 7:43 AM, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> David Thompson skribis:
>
>> From 339bc3a744ad07f8513fbbf4b1cfd7955fdf7f1d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: David Thompson
>> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 20:40:57 -0400
>> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: Add control g
David Thompson skribis:
> From 339bc3a744ad07f8513fbbf4b1cfd7955fdf7f1d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: David Thompson
> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 20:40:57 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: Add control group file systems.
>
> * gnu/system/file-systems.scm (%control-gro
>From 339bc3a744ad07f8513fbbf4b1cfd7955fdf7f1d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: David Thompson
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 20:40:57 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] gnu: Add control group file systems.
* gnu/system/file-systems.scm (%control-groups): New variable.
(%base-file-system): Include control gr
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> ‘guix system vm’ can now be told to share more file systems with the
> host, in addition to /gnu/store:
Awesome!
> Thanks David for giving me an incentive to work on this. ;-)
Thanks for doing the work! I will figure out how to take advantage of
this
‘guix system vm’ can now be told to share more file systems with the
host, in addition to /gnu/store:
Additional file systems can be shared between the host and the VM
using the ‘--share’ and ‘--expose’ command-line options: the former
specifies a directory to be shared with write
l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis:
> To support clean unmounting of file systems upon shutdown, special dmd
> services are added to the graph (see (gnu services base)):
>
> • ‘root-file-system’, whose stop action is to remount / read-only;
> this is the last service
Hello,
It’s now possible to declare file systems to be mounted in
‘operating-system’ declarations, like this:
(operating-system
(file-systems (list (file-system
(device "/dev/sda1")
(mount-point "/")
85 matches
Mail list logo
