Tony Nguyen wrote:
> Sebastien Roy wrote:
>> The "svcadm enable -ts datalink-management" trick in net-physical didn't 
>> work.  dladm exited with status 3, which is:
>>
>>       3    svcadm determined that a service instance that  it  was
>>            waiting  for  could not reach the desired state without
>>            administrator intervention due to a  problem  with  the
>>            service instance itself.
>>
>> I have a distinct feeling that it's because of the following dependency 
>> information in dlmgmt.xml:
>>
>>          <dependent name='network-physical'
>>                  grouping='require_all'
>>                  restart_on='none'>
>>                  <service_fmri value='svc:/network/physical' />
>>          </dependent>
>>
>> Can we express the dependency in the other direction to workaround this 
>> problem?
>>
> 
> Dependency implies certain starting order, dlmgnt -> network-physical, 
> thus reversing wouldn't get us the original desired starting order.

In any case, my idea didn't fix the problem.  It appears that something 
else bothers svcadm enable -ts, and its a mystery at this point.  Any 
help would be appreciated.

> Two narrow down the problem, can you
> 
> 1. Send "svcs -l datalink-management" output to get the current state of 
> the service(there may be a bug in the synchronous, -s option).

Before svcadm enable:

fmri         svc:/network/datalink-management:default
name         data-link management daemon
enabled      true
restarter    svc:/system/svc/restarter:default

After svcadm enable has failed:

fmri         svc:/network/datalink-management:default
name         data-link management daemon
enabled      true
restarter    svc:/system/svc/restarter:default

> 2. Output of network/physical log(alt_logfle) for clues from svcadm 
> enable -ts command.

I also noticed the following, and this is printed as a result of the 
svcadm enable -ts that fails:

svcadm: svc:/network/datalink-management:default is misconfigured (lacks 
"restarter" property group).

This seems very relevant.  What does this mean?

Thanks,
-Seb

Reply via email to