Mount fuse.mergerfs in udev script












1















I use a udev rule to recognize when a specific USB stick is plugged. When it's plugged in, a bash script is started which mounts some devices. That works very well after I did some changes to the systemd-udev service as described here.



However, one of the mounts fail. It is a fuse-mergerfs mount. The command itself seems to succeed, but when doing an ls on the mount folder I get a strange output and I cannot access the folder:



d?????????  ? ?    ?       ?            ? mountpoint


But if I run the mount command manually from the terminal everything is fine.



It also doesn't matter if the stick is plugged in during boot or if I plug it in after the system has already started. Mounting the fuse-mergerfs device does not work when mount is called by the udev script.



Do you have any ideas?










share|improve this question



























    1















    I use a udev rule to recognize when a specific USB stick is plugged. When it's plugged in, a bash script is started which mounts some devices. That works very well after I did some changes to the systemd-udev service as described here.



    However, one of the mounts fail. It is a fuse-mergerfs mount. The command itself seems to succeed, but when doing an ls on the mount folder I get a strange output and I cannot access the folder:



    d?????????  ? ?    ?       ?            ? mountpoint


    But if I run the mount command manually from the terminal everything is fine.



    It also doesn't matter if the stick is plugged in during boot or if I plug it in after the system has already started. Mounting the fuse-mergerfs device does not work when mount is called by the udev script.



    Do you have any ideas?










    share|improve this question

























      1












      1








      1








      I use a udev rule to recognize when a specific USB stick is plugged. When it's plugged in, a bash script is started which mounts some devices. That works very well after I did some changes to the systemd-udev service as described here.



      However, one of the mounts fail. It is a fuse-mergerfs mount. The command itself seems to succeed, but when doing an ls on the mount folder I get a strange output and I cannot access the folder:



      d?????????  ? ?    ?       ?            ? mountpoint


      But if I run the mount command manually from the terminal everything is fine.



      It also doesn't matter if the stick is plugged in during boot or if I plug it in after the system has already started. Mounting the fuse-mergerfs device does not work when mount is called by the udev script.



      Do you have any ideas?










      share|improve this question














      I use a udev rule to recognize when a specific USB stick is plugged. When it's plugged in, a bash script is started which mounts some devices. That works very well after I did some changes to the systemd-udev service as described here.



      However, one of the mounts fail. It is a fuse-mergerfs mount. The command itself seems to succeed, but when doing an ls on the mount folder I get a strange output and I cannot access the folder:



      d?????????  ? ?    ?       ?            ? mountpoint


      But if I run the mount command manually from the terminal everything is fine.



      It also doesn't matter if the stick is plugged in during boot or if I plug it in after the system has already started. Mounting the fuse-mergerfs device does not work when mount is called by the udev script.



      Do you have any ideas?







      systemd udev unionfs






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Jan 28 at 18:17









      BiggieBiggie

      20828




      20828






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2















          [Using RUN in udev rules] is only suitable for short-lived scripts, as they will be killed if they are stil running after a timeout period.




          I.e. the FUSE background process that implements your filesystem gets killed.



          One alternative that comes to mind: if you have the systemd-mount command, you could try using that in place of your mount command. It will create a transient .mount unit (as opposed to a .service unit), and run the mount program inside that unit.



          The source I am quoting tries to provide a more general solution for long-running processes:




          https://yakking.branchable.com/posts/systemd-2-udevd/



          If you need a longer-running service, then you should integrate it
          with a systemd unit, by defining the unit like:



          cat >/etc/systemd/system/my-service@.service <<'EOF'
          [Unit]
          Description=My Service
          [Service]
          Type=simple
          ExecStart=/path/to/your/script %I
          EOF


          And add ENV{SYSTEMD_WANTS}="my-service@%k.service" to the udev rule.



          This will run /path/to/your/script and pass it the path to the device
          that has just appeared.




          Unfortunately the above instructions are not correct for your case.



          Your problem is not that your script itself took too long before returning. The problem is that your script returns after starting a "background process"; the process that implements your FUSE filesystem. When the script finishes, systemd thinks it needs to clean up, and kill all the left-over processes which were started by the script.



          This case is very similar to a legacy sysvinit script. So we can use the same solution they do:



          When you write a systemd service to mount a FUSE filesystem, do not use Type=simple or Type=oneshot. Use Type=forking instead.






          share|improve this answer


























          • It doesn't look like it's killed. E.g. if I add a sleep to the script, the PC hangs for that amount of time during boot. So, the timeout seems to be high enough.However, I tried it with a systemd service. It executes my script, too. And again, all mounts work, except for the fuse.mergerfs mount. This time, no weird "????" are shown, but the device is mounted neither.

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:34













          • @Biggie regarding the second part only: only FUSE mounts require a long-running process. If none of the other mounts are FUSE mounts, that would explain the difference.

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:44











          • I do not get any error message. The mount command succeeds with exit code 0 :)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:56











          • "I cannot access the folder". What error message do you get when you try to access the folder?

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:57











          • It shows "Der Socket ist nicht verbunden". In english something like: "Socket ist not connected" or maybe "Transport endpoint" instead of socket ;)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 17:01











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "106"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f497266%2fmount-fuse-mergerfs-in-udev-script%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2















          [Using RUN in udev rules] is only suitable for short-lived scripts, as they will be killed if they are stil running after a timeout period.




          I.e. the FUSE background process that implements your filesystem gets killed.



          One alternative that comes to mind: if you have the systemd-mount command, you could try using that in place of your mount command. It will create a transient .mount unit (as opposed to a .service unit), and run the mount program inside that unit.



          The source I am quoting tries to provide a more general solution for long-running processes:




          https://yakking.branchable.com/posts/systemd-2-udevd/



          If you need a longer-running service, then you should integrate it
          with a systemd unit, by defining the unit like:



          cat >/etc/systemd/system/my-service@.service <<'EOF'
          [Unit]
          Description=My Service
          [Service]
          Type=simple
          ExecStart=/path/to/your/script %I
          EOF


          And add ENV{SYSTEMD_WANTS}="my-service@%k.service" to the udev rule.



          This will run /path/to/your/script and pass it the path to the device
          that has just appeared.




          Unfortunately the above instructions are not correct for your case.



          Your problem is not that your script itself took too long before returning. The problem is that your script returns after starting a "background process"; the process that implements your FUSE filesystem. When the script finishes, systemd thinks it needs to clean up, and kill all the left-over processes which were started by the script.



          This case is very similar to a legacy sysvinit script. So we can use the same solution they do:



          When you write a systemd service to mount a FUSE filesystem, do not use Type=simple or Type=oneshot. Use Type=forking instead.






          share|improve this answer


























          • It doesn't look like it's killed. E.g. if I add a sleep to the script, the PC hangs for that amount of time during boot. So, the timeout seems to be high enough.However, I tried it with a systemd service. It executes my script, too. And again, all mounts work, except for the fuse.mergerfs mount. This time, no weird "????" are shown, but the device is mounted neither.

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:34













          • @Biggie regarding the second part only: only FUSE mounts require a long-running process. If none of the other mounts are FUSE mounts, that would explain the difference.

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:44











          • I do not get any error message. The mount command succeeds with exit code 0 :)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:56











          • "I cannot access the folder". What error message do you get when you try to access the folder?

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:57











          • It shows "Der Socket ist nicht verbunden". In english something like: "Socket ist not connected" or maybe "Transport endpoint" instead of socket ;)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 17:01
















          2















          [Using RUN in udev rules] is only suitable for short-lived scripts, as they will be killed if they are stil running after a timeout period.




          I.e. the FUSE background process that implements your filesystem gets killed.



          One alternative that comes to mind: if you have the systemd-mount command, you could try using that in place of your mount command. It will create a transient .mount unit (as opposed to a .service unit), and run the mount program inside that unit.



          The source I am quoting tries to provide a more general solution for long-running processes:




          https://yakking.branchable.com/posts/systemd-2-udevd/



          If you need a longer-running service, then you should integrate it
          with a systemd unit, by defining the unit like:



          cat >/etc/systemd/system/my-service@.service <<'EOF'
          [Unit]
          Description=My Service
          [Service]
          Type=simple
          ExecStart=/path/to/your/script %I
          EOF


          And add ENV{SYSTEMD_WANTS}="my-service@%k.service" to the udev rule.



          This will run /path/to/your/script and pass it the path to the device
          that has just appeared.




          Unfortunately the above instructions are not correct for your case.



          Your problem is not that your script itself took too long before returning. The problem is that your script returns after starting a "background process"; the process that implements your FUSE filesystem. When the script finishes, systemd thinks it needs to clean up, and kill all the left-over processes which were started by the script.



          This case is very similar to a legacy sysvinit script. So we can use the same solution they do:



          When you write a systemd service to mount a FUSE filesystem, do not use Type=simple or Type=oneshot. Use Type=forking instead.






          share|improve this answer


























          • It doesn't look like it's killed. E.g. if I add a sleep to the script, the PC hangs for that amount of time during boot. So, the timeout seems to be high enough.However, I tried it with a systemd service. It executes my script, too. And again, all mounts work, except for the fuse.mergerfs mount. This time, no weird "????" are shown, but the device is mounted neither.

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:34













          • @Biggie regarding the second part only: only FUSE mounts require a long-running process. If none of the other mounts are FUSE mounts, that would explain the difference.

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:44











          • I do not get any error message. The mount command succeeds with exit code 0 :)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:56











          • "I cannot access the folder". What error message do you get when you try to access the folder?

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:57











          • It shows "Der Socket ist nicht verbunden". In english something like: "Socket ist not connected" or maybe "Transport endpoint" instead of socket ;)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 17:01














          2












          2








          2








          [Using RUN in udev rules] is only suitable for short-lived scripts, as they will be killed if they are stil running after a timeout period.




          I.e. the FUSE background process that implements your filesystem gets killed.



          One alternative that comes to mind: if you have the systemd-mount command, you could try using that in place of your mount command. It will create a transient .mount unit (as opposed to a .service unit), and run the mount program inside that unit.



          The source I am quoting tries to provide a more general solution for long-running processes:




          https://yakking.branchable.com/posts/systemd-2-udevd/



          If you need a longer-running service, then you should integrate it
          with a systemd unit, by defining the unit like:



          cat >/etc/systemd/system/my-service@.service <<'EOF'
          [Unit]
          Description=My Service
          [Service]
          Type=simple
          ExecStart=/path/to/your/script %I
          EOF


          And add ENV{SYSTEMD_WANTS}="my-service@%k.service" to the udev rule.



          This will run /path/to/your/script and pass it the path to the device
          that has just appeared.




          Unfortunately the above instructions are not correct for your case.



          Your problem is not that your script itself took too long before returning. The problem is that your script returns after starting a "background process"; the process that implements your FUSE filesystem. When the script finishes, systemd thinks it needs to clean up, and kill all the left-over processes which were started by the script.



          This case is very similar to a legacy sysvinit script. So we can use the same solution they do:



          When you write a systemd service to mount a FUSE filesystem, do not use Type=simple or Type=oneshot. Use Type=forking instead.






          share|improve this answer
















          [Using RUN in udev rules] is only suitable for short-lived scripts, as they will be killed if they are stil running after a timeout period.




          I.e. the FUSE background process that implements your filesystem gets killed.



          One alternative that comes to mind: if you have the systemd-mount command, you could try using that in place of your mount command. It will create a transient .mount unit (as opposed to a .service unit), and run the mount program inside that unit.



          The source I am quoting tries to provide a more general solution for long-running processes:




          https://yakking.branchable.com/posts/systemd-2-udevd/



          If you need a longer-running service, then you should integrate it
          with a systemd unit, by defining the unit like:



          cat >/etc/systemd/system/my-service@.service <<'EOF'
          [Unit]
          Description=My Service
          [Service]
          Type=simple
          ExecStart=/path/to/your/script %I
          EOF


          And add ENV{SYSTEMD_WANTS}="my-service@%k.service" to the udev rule.



          This will run /path/to/your/script and pass it the path to the device
          that has just appeared.




          Unfortunately the above instructions are not correct for your case.



          Your problem is not that your script itself took too long before returning. The problem is that your script returns after starting a "background process"; the process that implements your FUSE filesystem. When the script finishes, systemd thinks it needs to clean up, and kill all the left-over processes which were started by the script.



          This case is very similar to a legacy sysvinit script. So we can use the same solution they do:



          When you write a systemd service to mount a FUSE filesystem, do not use Type=simple or Type=oneshot. Use Type=forking instead.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Feb 2 at 16:53

























          answered Jan 28 at 18:52









          sourcejedisourcejedi

          24.1k439106




          24.1k439106













          • It doesn't look like it's killed. E.g. if I add a sleep to the script, the PC hangs for that amount of time during boot. So, the timeout seems to be high enough.However, I tried it with a systemd service. It executes my script, too. And again, all mounts work, except for the fuse.mergerfs mount. This time, no weird "????" are shown, but the device is mounted neither.

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:34













          • @Biggie regarding the second part only: only FUSE mounts require a long-running process. If none of the other mounts are FUSE mounts, that would explain the difference.

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:44











          • I do not get any error message. The mount command succeeds with exit code 0 :)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:56











          • "I cannot access the folder". What error message do you get when you try to access the folder?

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:57











          • It shows "Der Socket ist nicht verbunden". In english something like: "Socket ist not connected" or maybe "Transport endpoint" instead of socket ;)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 17:01



















          • It doesn't look like it's killed. E.g. if I add a sleep to the script, the PC hangs for that amount of time during boot. So, the timeout seems to be high enough.However, I tried it with a systemd service. It executes my script, too. And again, all mounts work, except for the fuse.mergerfs mount. This time, no weird "????" are shown, but the device is mounted neither.

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:34













          • @Biggie regarding the second part only: only FUSE mounts require a long-running process. If none of the other mounts are FUSE mounts, that would explain the difference.

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:44











          • I do not get any error message. The mount command succeeds with exit code 0 :)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 16:56











          • "I cannot access the folder". What error message do you get when you try to access the folder?

            – sourcejedi
            Jan 29 at 16:57











          • It shows "Der Socket ist nicht verbunden". In english something like: "Socket ist not connected" or maybe "Transport endpoint" instead of socket ;)

            – Biggie
            Jan 29 at 17:01

















          It doesn't look like it's killed. E.g. if I add a sleep to the script, the PC hangs for that amount of time during boot. So, the timeout seems to be high enough.However, I tried it with a systemd service. It executes my script, too. And again, all mounts work, except for the fuse.mergerfs mount. This time, no weird "????" are shown, but the device is mounted neither.

          – Biggie
          Jan 29 at 16:34







          It doesn't look like it's killed. E.g. if I add a sleep to the script, the PC hangs for that amount of time during boot. So, the timeout seems to be high enough.However, I tried it with a systemd service. It executes my script, too. And again, all mounts work, except for the fuse.mergerfs mount. This time, no weird "????" are shown, but the device is mounted neither.

          – Biggie
          Jan 29 at 16:34















          @Biggie regarding the second part only: only FUSE mounts require a long-running process. If none of the other mounts are FUSE mounts, that would explain the difference.

          – sourcejedi
          Jan 29 at 16:44





          @Biggie regarding the second part only: only FUSE mounts require a long-running process. If none of the other mounts are FUSE mounts, that would explain the difference.

          – sourcejedi
          Jan 29 at 16:44













          I do not get any error message. The mount command succeeds with exit code 0 :)

          – Biggie
          Jan 29 at 16:56





          I do not get any error message. The mount command succeeds with exit code 0 :)

          – Biggie
          Jan 29 at 16:56













          "I cannot access the folder". What error message do you get when you try to access the folder?

          – sourcejedi
          Jan 29 at 16:57





          "I cannot access the folder". What error message do you get when you try to access the folder?

          – sourcejedi
          Jan 29 at 16:57













          It shows "Der Socket ist nicht verbunden". In english something like: "Socket ist not connected" or maybe "Transport endpoint" instead of socket ;)

          – Biggie
          Jan 29 at 17:01





          It shows "Der Socket ist nicht verbunden". In english something like: "Socket ist not connected" or maybe "Transport endpoint" instead of socket ;)

          – Biggie
          Jan 29 at 17:01


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f497266%2fmount-fuse-mergerfs-in-udev-script%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          How to make a Squid Proxy server?

          Is this a new Fibonacci Identity?

          19世紀