Re: Always run rpc-pipefs-generator generator (was: Re: Why keep var-lib-nfs-rpc_pipefs.mount around?)

[Andreas Hasenack <andreas@canonical.com>]

On it, need to refresh some knowledge and think with an upstream hat on now :)

On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 6:12 AM Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 10:39:43AM -0400, Benjamin Coddington wrote:
> > On 9 Jul 2023, at 3:38, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Steve,
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > FWIW, in Debian we have applied the respective change. The idea would
> > > be to only depend on a single mechanism for setting up the mounts
> > > rather than a combination of the two (the generator and the static
> > > mount unit). For this reason we have applied the attached patch, and
> > > are not installing the units that we will let the generator produce,
> > > that is var-lib-nfs-rpc_pipefs.mount and rpc_pipefs.target
> > >
> > > We in Debian for long have diverged too much from you upstream,
> > > causing that we lacked behind several new upstream version and stuck
> > > with old versions in stable releases. We want to avoid running into
> > > that again in future. So if this make sense to you, would you apply
> > > the same (or as you prefer similar) change to you upstream?
> > >
> > > On one side so you could apply Andreas Hasenack patch, secondly
> > > installing the var-lib-nfs-rpc_pipefs.mount and rpc_pipefs.target
> > > could be dropped (note no changes to the other units needed as the
> > > repsective needed dependencies are generated by the systemd
> > > generator).
> > >
> > > Ben, Andreas, please add what else is needed from your point of view
> > > please!
> >
> > I don't think I've seen the PATCH land on the list addressed to nfs-utils
> > maintainer yet, but I could have missed it.
> >
> > Otherwise it looks sane to me, but I could be missing some upstream case.
> >
> > > Thanks a lot for considering this. If you have any suggestion further
> > > how we can unify the Debian downstream to you upstream, let us know
> > > please.
> >
> > At Red Hat, we use "upstream first" as a leading principle.  If this change
> > makes sense for upstream, send Adreas' patch along and I am sure Steve D will
> > consider it or let us know why its not acceptible for upstream.
>
> Andreas, could you sent a proper patchset please, so upstream can have
> a look at it for inclusion?
>
> Regards,
> Salvatore