Closed evilham closed 4 years ago
Would this have been a function of zfsd?
Hello, I don't know, but I will look into a couple 'legacy' ZFS issues over the weekend, do you have any pointers as to how I could determine if that was indeed the case?
I think you might be missing a necessary change to /etc/rc.d/zfs to import additional pools on boot (it should have been pushed to mattmacy/networking:projects/openzfs_vendor by now)
\o I just had the chance to try compiling and installing the updated repos and still observed this behaviour.
Because of your pointer I checked and indeed a change is not being installed:
> diff /etc/rc.d/zfs libexec/rc/rc.d/zfs
27a28,34
> local cachefile
>
> for cachefile in /boot/zfs/zpool.cache /etc/zfs/zpool.cache; do
> if [ -r $cachefile ]; then
> zpool import -c $cachefile -a
> fi
> done
Also vis /etc/zfs/zpool.cache
does list my pool, so I really think you are right here, will manually install it and finish confirming tomorrow.
In my build flow I use WITH_META_MODE
, could this be the reason why the change is not being installed? Could it be something else I can help debug?
Interesting, I don't know. 🤔
Huh! Just made a test, deleted /etc/rc.d/zfs
and ran make install | tee install.log
, afterwards /etc/rc.d/zfs
is missing and cat install.log | grep rc.d/zfs
stays empty.
Could anyone else check if the rc script is being installed properly on their system?
This is working in base now. The latest rc scripts should be installed by etcupdate.
Previously observed behaviour with zfs kmod (from HEAD):
With the patches for OpenZFS, number 5 and 6 are instead:
This is different but unsure if it's to be considered critical.
Creating here for archive as per: https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2020-July/076551.html