On Fri, 31.10.14 07:57, Matthew Miller (mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 07:39:42AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:33:20PM +0100, Michal Schmidt wrote: > > > > Oct 30 21:39:47 ubik.home.mkmiller.org systemd[1]: Found ordering cycle on basic.target/start > > > > Oct 30 21:39:47 ubik.home.mkmiller.org systemd[1]: Breaking ordering cycle by deleting job sysinit.target/start > > > are you showing only messages at loglevel "warning" and higher? > > > Because in between these two lines I'd expect to see some > > > "Found dependency on <service>/<job_type>" at loglevel "info". > > That's everything with _COMM=systemd since boot. Possibly loglevel > > itself is set low? I'll enable more debugging and post that. > > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found ordering cycle on basic.target/start > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found dependency on sysinit.target/start > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found dependency on systemd-update-utmp.service/verify-active > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found dependency on systemd-tmpfiles-setup.service/start > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found dependency on systemd-journal-flush.service/start > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found dependency on remote-fs.target/start > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found dependency on remote-fs-pre.target/start > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found dependency on nfs-client.target/start > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found dependency on gssproxy.service/start > Oct 31 07:42:29 ubik systemd[1]: Found dependency on basic.target/start So the problem appears to be that gssproxy.service been ordered before remote-fs-pre.target. That target is ordered before basic.target. However gssproxy.service also is ordered after basic.target (simply because all services by default are ordered before basic.target, unless they explicitly specify DefaultDependencies=no), hence there's an ordering cycle. Most likely some NFS maintainers tried to move gss-proxy.service into the early boot, and didn't set DefaultDependencies=no. That said, services running in early boot must be written in a specific style (i.e. not assume /var to be around, and suchlike), I do wonder if gssproxy is ready for that. Anyway, long story short: file a bug against the gssproxy package. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
