On 3/3/20 11:08 PM, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote: >>> hmm, can we not just add a after dependency in the "networking.service" on >>> the >>> already existing "systemd-udev-settle.service" service? > > this was the first proposal in the discuss > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=920623 > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?att=1;bug=920623;filename=0001-Depend-on-systemd-udev-settle.service-in-networking..patch;msg=27 > > I'm not sure why they have use another -pre.service for ifupdown1.
AFAICT, they wanted to avoid pulling a systemd specific service with something such core like the ifupdown as it would break init-freedom thus they opted to an extra service. > > I just have follow the same behaviour than ifupdown1 to be sure that is > working the same for ifupdown2. I mean, this makes somewhat sense to do, but in this case I'm not sure. We pull in the "systemd-udev-settle.service" through a require from "zfs-import-cache.service" anyhow, plus we're systemd only anyway.. @Fabian, what do you think? _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com https://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
