Re: ZFS on Guix, again

[raid5atemyhomework]

BUMP

> Hi Ludo,
>
> > > I agree with 宋文武 regarding ‘file-system-service-type’.
> > > raid5atemyhomework raid5atemyhomework@protonmail.com skribis:
> > >
> > > > However, for the case where the user expects the "typical" ZFS style of 
> > > > managing file systems, we need to mount all the ZFS file systems and 
> > > > ensure that they aer all already mounted by the time `file-systems` 
> > > > Shepherd service is started. This means we need to be able to extend 
> > > > the `requirement` of the `file-systems` Shepherd service. And we need 
> > > > to do that without putting any extra `/etc/fstab` entries since for 
> > > > "typical" ZFS style of managing file systems, they are required to not 
> > > > be put in `/etc/fstab`.
> > >
> > > Looks like this fstab issue is the main reason why you felt the need to
> > > define an extra service type. Why is it important that ZFS not be
> > > listed in /etc/fstab?
> >
> > Because on all non-Guix operating systems, they aren't listed 
> > in`/etc/fstab`:
> >
> > -   
> > https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19120-01/open.solaris/817-2271/gaztn/index.html
>
> So what do we do here?
>
> -   Force all ZFS filesystems to be declared `mountpoint=legacy` and be 
> written as `file-system` declarations in the `operating-system` (which will 
> eventually reach `/etc/fstab`).
>     -   This is undesirable since ZFS users expect that setting up mount 
> points for ZPOOL and ZFS datasets are just handled by the same commands that 
> create the ZPOOL and ZFS dataset. This is in contrast with other file systems 
> where the creation of the filesystem is a separate step from adding its mount 
> point.
>     -   If a ZFS filesystem is created or destroyed (for example I might want 
> to create a temporary filesystem to `zfs send` to in order to implement 
> defragmentation, or to recompress data if I forgot to set `compression=on`) 
> then the user has to edit the configuration file and then `guix system 
> reconfigure` in order to make the changes stick. Most ZFS users just create 
> and destroy ZFS datasets as part of maintenance.
>     -   If Guix goes this way, most ZFS users (including me) will not 
> consider ZFS support on Guix to be anywhere near "serviceable".
> -   Hack a `fstab?` field in `file-system` forms.
>     -   Arguably bad design.
> -   Just split up the Shepherd service into a 
> `file-systems-target-service-type` and have `file-systems-service-type` 
> extend it, like I already proposed before.
>
> Also how about`linux-loadable-modules-service-type`? Is the proposed design 
> okay? Do we really want to name it `linux-loadable-modules-service-type` in 
> contrast to the current `operating-system` field `kernel-loadable-modules`?
>
> Thanks
> raid5atemyhomework
>
> Thanks
> raid5atemyhomework