Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-11-02 Thread Rich Freeman
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Tom H wrote: > > AIUI, "After=network.target" (and similarly "After=syslog.target") is > equivalent to having "Wants=network.service NetworkManager.service > " and "After=network.service > NetworkManager.service ". Actually, as far as I understand things, if you do

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-11-02 Thread Tom H
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Tom H wrote: >> >> Do you have an example of a service that uses "After=" but doesn't >> need a "Requires=" or a "Wants="? I'm either being unimaginative or >> plain dumb, but I can't think of any. > > sshd.se

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-31 Thread Jc García
2014-10-31 17:01 GMT-06:00 Tom H : > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Tom H wrote: > > >>> Is "After" really necessary as an option? I've never come across a >>> service that uses "After" without a "Requires" or a Wants" but I've >>> never t

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-31 Thread Rich Freeman
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Tom H wrote: > > Do you have an example of a service that uses "After=" but doesn't > need a "Requires=" or a "Wants="? I'm either being unimaginative or > plain dumb, but I can't think of any. Some examples I found: smbd.service sshd.service mythbackend.service n

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-31 Thread Tom H
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Tom H wrote: >> Is "After" really necessary as an option? I've never come across a >> service that uses "After" without a "Requires" or a Wants" but I've >> never taken the time to look. > > Hmm, I found Aft

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-31 Thread Rich Freeman
On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Tom H wrote: > Is "After" really necessary as an option? I've never come across a > service that uses "After" without a "Requires" or a Wants" but I've > never taken the time to look. > Hmm, I found After more common that Wants, but maybe I only look at units that

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-31 Thread Tom H
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Tom H wrote: >> Since Gentoo's rpcbind.service has "Wants=rpcbind.target" and >> "Before=rpcbind.target"", having nfs-server.service depend on >> rpcbind.target rather than rpcbind.service should work as long

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-28 Thread Rich Freeman
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 9:36 PM, Tom H wrote: > Since Gentoo's rpcbind.service has "Wants=rpcbind.target" and > "Before=rpcbind.target"", having nfs-server.service depend on > rpcbind.target rather than rpcbind.service should work as long as > rpcbind.service is enabled. > > But having "Requires=r

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-28 Thread Tom H
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 6:18 PM, walt wrote: > On 10/27/2014 08:22 PM, Tom H wrote: >> >> The 1.2.9 nfs-utils ebuild has "systemd_dounit >> "${FILESDIR}"/nfsd.service" where nfsd.service has >> "Requires=rpcbind.service" and "After=rpcbind.service". >> >> The 1.3.0 nfs-utils ebuild has "systemd_do

[gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-28 Thread walt
On 10/27/2014 08:22 PM, Tom H wrote: > The 1.2.9 nfs-utils ebuild has "systemd_dounit > "${FILESDIR}"/nfsd.service" where nfsd.service has > "Requires=rpcbind.service" and "After=rpcbind.service". > > The 1.3.0 nfs-utils ebuild has "systemd_dounit > systemd/*.{mount,service,target}" where nfs-serv

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-27 Thread Tom H
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Tom H wrote: > Does rpcbind.target exist? Does rpcbind.service have a "Requires" or > "Wants" for rpcbind.target? Is rpcbind.service enabled? ... > I don't have access to a Gentoo box with nfs at the moment in order to > check this but IIRC Gentoo used to use O

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-27 Thread Tom H
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 7:46 PM, walt wrote: > On 10/27/2014 12:56 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 1:38 PM, walt wrote: >>> >>> Last night when I powered off my machines NFS was working perfectly. Today >>> it's broken again for the nth time: >>> >>> #systemctl status n

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-27 Thread Canek Peláez Valdés
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:46 PM, walt wrote: > On 10/27/2014 12:56 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 1:38 PM, walt wrote: >>> Last night when I powered off my machines NFS was working perfectly. Today >>> it's broken again for the nth time: >>> >>> #systemctl status nfs-s

[gentoo-user] Re: [~amd64] NFS server broken again :(

2014-10-27 Thread walt
On 10/27/2014 12:56 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 1:38 PM, walt wrote: >> Last night when I powered off my machines NFS was working perfectly. Today >> it's broken again for the nth time: >> >> #systemctl status nfs-server >> ● nfs-server.service - NFS server and servic