On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:40:36PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: > On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 15:29:09 -0400 > "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 08:52:45AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: > > > It will not, but right now gssproxy.service also has: > > > Requires=proc-fs-nfsd.mount > > > > > > I want to drop this one. > > > > By the way, I think all you actually want is After=proc-fs-nfsd.mount. > > > > You don't actually want to bail out if fs-nfsd.mount fails, in fact > > you don't care if it's activated at all, all you care about is that > > *if* it's already activated (because nfsd is), then you want it to > > start before you. > > > > And in fact we could instead replace that with a > > Before=gssproxy.service in proc-fs-nfsd.mount if you preferred. I > > don't know how to decide which place it goes, or if it matters. > > Given we are already messing with service files I wouldn't object to > moving the depenecy chain creation in nfs-util by adding a > Before=gssproxy.service directive in proc-fs-nfsd.mount and dropping > the Reuire from gssproxy.service Wella ctually we should add the auth-rpcgss unit (which includes the necessary Before). But you might want to s/Requires=/After=/ meanwhile as the current thing seems possibly unreliable (since there's no ordering dependency). --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
