You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Pages: 1
#1 2021-02-12 08:20:52
- apaz
- Member
- Registered: 2018-07-23
- Posts: 130
[Solved] Doubts about LVM
I don't use LVM in my system so I blacklist its services and set lvm_etad=0 in lvm.conf.
With the new lvm update, the lvm_etad parameter no longer exists.
Has anything changed? The wiki still has the phrase:
The use_lvmetad = 1 must be set in /etc/lvm/lvm.conf. This is the default now - if you have a lvm.conf.pacnew file, you must merge this change.
If you don't want to use LVM is there anything you need to do?
Last edited by apaz (2021-02-16 07:40:53)
Offline
#2 2021-02-15 12:02:01
- Lone_Wolf
- Administrator
- From: Netherlands, Europe
- Registered: 2005-10-04
- Posts: 15,374
Re: [Solved] Doubts about LVM
You probably mean the use_lvmetad parameter ?
I also disable lvm and have use_lvmetad=0 in my /etc/lvm/lvm.conf .
No issues sofar since lvm2 was updated.
Disliking systemd intensely, but not satisfied with alternatives so focusing on taming systemd.
clean chroot building not flexible enough ?
Try clean chroot manager by graysky
Offline
#3 2021-02-15 12:04:05
- frostschutz
- Member
- Registered: 2013-11-15
- Posts: 1,652
Re: [Solved] Doubts about LVM
lvmetad was removed in lvm 2.03 and archlinux updated to that branch so it's gone for good
Offline
#4 2021-02-16 07:39:10
- apaz
- Member
- Registered: 2018-07-23
- Posts: 130
Re: [Solved] Doubts about LVM
@Lone_Wolf
Yes, sorry. I really meant "use_lvmetad".
@frostschutz
OK, thanks. So both those who use LVM and those who don't will no longer have to deal with the "lvmetad" parameter. To me that's a good thing.
Do you think it's useful to blacklist lvm2 modules or is it not worth it? In theory I don't like having demons around that I don't use, but in practice I don't think there's any differences.
Offline
#5 2021-02-16 09:10:06
- frostschutz
- Member
- Registered: 2013-11-15
- Posts: 1,652
Re: [Solved] Doubts about LVM
If you don't use it, can't you just uninstall it altogether?
Offline
#6 2021-02-16 11:06:20
- Lone_Wolf
- Administrator
- From: Netherlands, Europe
- Registered: 2005-10-04
- Posts: 15,374
Re: [Solved] Doubts about LVM
If you don't use it, can't you just uninstall it altogether?
Short answer
$ pactree --reverse --sync lvm2 | wc -l
833
$removing lvm2 severely limits what programs you can nstall
long answer
$ pactree --reverse --depth 2 --sync lvm2
lvm2
├─archboot
├─libblockdev
│ └─udisks2
├─libguestfs
└─osquery
$removing or not installing archboot , libguestfs and osquery is doable, but libblockdev / udisks2 is a problem.
$ pactree --reverse --depth 1 --sync udisks2
udisks2
├─calibre
├─cantata
├─deepin-daemon
├─enlightenment
├─gnome-control-center
├─gnome-disk-utility
├─gnome-multi-writer
├─gvfs
├─peony
├─psensor
├─rapid-photo-downloader
├─solid
├─strawberry
├─udiskie
└─udisks2-qt5
$Solid & gvfs are used by majority of Gnome / KDE environments and applications .
The only viable method to get rid of lvm2 seems to be building libblockdev without lvm2 support or with optional lvm2 support .
No idea if that's doable .
Disliking systemd intensely, but not satisfied with alternatives so focusing on taming systemd.
clean chroot building not flexible enough ?
Try clean chroot manager by graysky
Offline
#7 2021-02-16 11:47:10
- frostschutz
- Member
- Registered: 2013-11-15
- Posts: 1,652
Re: [Solved] Doubts about LVM
Right, sorry, I use LVM everywhere anyway, so I kind of forget about these dependencies :-)
Offline
#8 2021-02-16 12:28:14
- eschwartz
- Fellow
- Registered: 2014-08-08
- Posts: 4,097
Re: [Solved] Doubts about LVM
I've built a custom libblockdev package without lvm support for a long time.
Index: PKGBUILD
===================================================================
--- PKGBUILD (revision 407826)
+++ PKGBUILD (working copy)
@@ -7,8 +7,8 @@
arch=('x86_64')
url="https://github.com/rhinstaller/libblockdev"
license=('LGPL')
-depends=('btrfs-progs' 'dosfstools' 'dmraid' 'gptfdisk' 'libbytesize' 'lvm2' 'mdadm' 'ndctl'
- 'parted' 'volume_key' 'xfsprogs' 'kmod' 'libyaml')
+depends=('btrfs-progs' 'dosfstools' 'gptfdisk' 'libbytesize' 'ndctl'
+ 'parted' 'kmod' 'libyaml')
makedepends=('autoconf-archive' 'gobject-introspection' 'systemd' 'python')
source=("$pkgname-$pkgver.tar.gz::https://github.com/rhinstaller/libblockdev/archive/$pkgver-1.tar.gz")
sha512sums=('d78a5a506b2d1c12dc218987ccf422e25ea06b2f71cc4ea39b86d1e23842b29b49832f1dfe6da318a14de94f7e66c0070f3e34443c4feb89e4e8f04c1971aa9e')
@@ -16,7 +16,10 @@
build() {
cd "$srcdir"/$pkgname-$pkgver-1
./autogen.sh
- ./configure --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc --without-lvm_dbus
+ ./configure --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc --without-lvm_dbus \
+ --without-dm \
+ --without-lvm \
+ --without-crypto
make
}
@@ -29,3 +32,6 @@
cd "$srcdir"/$pkgname-$pkgver-1
make DESTDIR="$pkgdir" install
}
+
+pkgrel+=".1"
+options+=(strip debug)Last edited by eschwartz (2021-02-16 12:28:57)
Managing AUR repos The Right Way -- aurpublish (now a standalone tool)
Offline
#9 2021-02-17 09:24:27
- Lone_Wolf
- Administrator
- From: Netherlands, Europe
- Registered: 2005-10-04
- Posts: 15,374
Re: [Solved] Doubts about LVM
Thank you, eschwartz.
lvm2 & thin-provisioning-tools are now removed from my system.
Disliking systemd intensely, but not satisfied with alternatives so focusing on taming systemd.
clean chroot building not flexible enough ?
Try clean chroot manager by graysky
Offline
Pages: 1