Add configuration option to use tmpfs in place of ramfs #355
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Mic92
reviewed
Jul 24, 2023
Mic92
reviewed
Jul 24, 2023
|
@mergify squash |
allow use of tmpfs via option configuration * Tabs vs Spaces * Update modules/sops/default.nix * Update modules/sops/default.nix
✅ Pull request squashed successfully |
|
@mergify queue |
🛑 The pull request has been merged manuallyThe pull request has been merged manually at 339a559 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Taking a stab at an implementation to address #236.
This PR adds an option to use tmpfs in place of ramfs on systems where ramfs is unavailable. Happy to workshop the warning if the verbiage is not clear enough.
Tested on two systems: personal laptop used ramfs as expected (new option left default), OpenVZ server used tmpfs as configured (
sops.useTmpfs = true;).