https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809819 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809819#c2 --- Comment #2 from Ralf Friedl 2013-03-18 16:36:35 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) Thank you for the tip with nofail. It sounds good, but it seems the option is not honored by systemd-fstab-generator. This is my new fstab: /dev/sdb /mnt vfat nofail,shortname=win95,fmask=133,utf8 0 0 /dev/sdb1 /mnt vfat nofail,shortname=win95,fmask=133,utf8 0 0 According to man fstab, "nofail: do not report errors for this device if it does not exist." My problem is not that the device does not exist, but that systemd-fstab-generator exits with an error if there is more than one entry for one destination directory, even if they should not be executed at all. Using "mount -a" would just ignore these lines, and it is not clear why systemd-fstab-generator generates files for noauto lines in fstab at all. I also read up on the suggestion with udisks. It seems that I can get almost the same effect that I have now with mount -r /dev/sdb1 if I type instead udisks --mount /dev/sdb1 --mount-options ro,shortname=win95,fmask=133 I just have to type much more, and I don't know where it will be mounted. I hope there is a way to specify the mount options, but I read the man pages and I didn't find any mention of configuration files. I found out that udisks will take the mount options and even the mount point from the fstab file, although I didn't find hints about that in the man pages. With this, I would for the same effect only need udisks --mount /dev/sdb1 --mount-options ro But then I have again the problem that systemd-fstab-generator aborts the boot sequence. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809819 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809819#c4 --- Comment #4 from Ralf Friedl 2013-03-18 17:35:43 UTC --- I looked at udisksctl, and it seems similar to udisks, just with a little different syntax. According to the man page, udisksctl is a command-line interface for the udisksd daemon, while udisks is a command-line interface for the udisks system bus service. This udisks system bus service is either also the udisksd daemon, or it is the udisks-daemon, or gvfs-udisks2-volume-monitor. Together these are four processes running for no good reason. 1316 ? Ssl 0:35 /usr/lib/udisks2/udisksd --no-debug 21053 ? Sl 0:00 /usr/lib/gvfs/gvfs-udisks2-volume-monitor 25299 ? Sl 0:00 /usr/lib/udisks/udisks-daemon 25300 ? S 0:00 udisks-daemon: not polling any devices I don't know what you consider "the right thing" regarding the device detection, but I don't want anything to happen upon device detection, except for the creation of the files /dev/sd*. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809819 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809819#c6 Ralf Friedl changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #6 from Ralf Friedl 2013-03-21 11:34:21 UTC --- The updated packages from https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809820#c2 fix this problem, too. Thank you. By the way, I have another use case for this, but that system is not yet updated. There I have fstab entries like LABEL=backup1 /path/backup LABEL=backup2 /path/backup ... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.