Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

remove SmackFileSystemRootLabel= again #1696

Closed
poettering opened this issue Oct 27, 2015 · 6 comments
Closed

remove SmackFileSystemRootLabel= again #1696

poettering opened this issue Oct 27, 2015 · 6 comments

Comments

@poettering
Copy link
Member

As it turns out, we might not actually need it. If so, let's kill it before the next release.

@poettering
Copy link
Member Author

@karelzak
Copy link
Contributor

@again4you please, try it without systemd -- it means manually mount(8) on command line. Now libmount supports:

smackfsdef=, smackfsfloor=, smackfshat=, smackfsroot= and smackfstransmute=

mount options and /sys/fs/smackfs is used to detect if smack is enabled. You need util-linux compiled --with-smack. You can use

LIBMOUNT_DEBUG=all mount /tmp ....

or strace to see what mount(8) does with your mount options. Thanks.

@poettering
Copy link
Member Author

@again4you ping?

@poettering
Copy link
Member Author

@again4you could you please comment? Otherwise we'll remove the option again for the upcoming release.

@poettering
Copy link
Member Author

OK, I figure we should remove the option, as it apparently is unnecessary and done by mount anyway, implicitly, and @again4you has not responded so far.

poettering added a commit to poettering/systemd that referenced this issue Nov 12, 2015
Apparently, util-linux' mount command implicitly drops the smack-related
options anyway before passing them to the kernel, if the kernel doesn't
know SMACK, hence there's no point in duplicating this in systemd.

Fixes systemd#1696
@poettering
Copy link
Member Author

OK, I prepped a patch that removes it again in #1864.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants