On 27 Jul 2022, at 13:24, Steve Dickson wrote: > From: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@xxxxxxxxxx> > > When `systemctl stop rpcbind.socket` is run, the dependency means > that systemd first sends SIGTERM to rpcbind, then sigterm to rpc.statd. > > On SIGTERM, rpcbind tears down /var/run/rpcbind.sock. However, > rpc-statd on SIGTERM attempts to unregister from rpcbind > > systemd needs to wait for rpc.statd to exit before sending > SIGTERM to rpcbind > > Fixes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2100395 > Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson <steved@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > systemd/rpc-statd.service | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/systemd/rpc-statd.service b/systemd/rpc-statd.service > index 095629f2..392750da 100644 > --- a/systemd/rpc-statd.service > +++ b/systemd/rpc-statd.service > @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Conflicts=umount.target > Requires=nss-lookup.target rpcbind.socket > Wants=network-online.target > Wants=rpc-statd-notify.service > -After=network-online.target nss-lookup.target rpcbind.socket > +After=network-online.target nss-lookup.target rpcbind.service > > PartOf=nfs-utils.service > IgnoreOnIsolate=yes > -- > 2.34.1 Hey Steve - thanks for patchifying this - I should have sent a proper patch, but the reason I didn't is that I didn't understand why we have the rpcbind.socket unit, and why that unit isn't sufficient to enforce the ordering. I don't remember the history. Will changing the After= here create a problem where rpcbind.service is up, but the socket isn't there yet, and then rpc.statd comes up and can't find the socket? Ben
