Ok, perhaps this is stupid, but I have a dependency question where the 
answer isn't what I expect.

nv_47, but reproducible on all s10's I've tried as well.

Consider the following

svc:/network/rpc/bind:default disabled
svc:/network/rpc/meta:default enabled
svc:/system/mdmonitor:default enabled
svc:/system/metainit:default enabled

ignoring the question of whether or not this is a brilliant idea (since 
lots of things are going to have issues), reboot the system.

I find
# svcs metainit meta bind multi-user
STATE          STIME    FMRI
disabled        6:52:54 svc:/network/rpc/bind:default
online          6:53:00 svc:/system/metainit:default
offline         6:52:58 svc:/milestone/multi-user:default
offline         6:53:11 svc:/network/rpc/meta:default
# svcs -xv multi-user
svc:/milestone/multi-user:default (multi-user milestone)
  State: offline since September  7, 2006  6:52:58 AM EDT
Reason: Service svc:/network/rpc/bind:default is disabled.
    See: http://sun.com/msg/SMF-8000-GE
   Path: svc:/milestone/multi-user:default
           svc:/system/mdmonitor:default
             svc:/network/rpc/meta:default
               svc:/network/rpc/bind:default
    See: man -M /usr/share/man -s 1M init
Impact: 2 dependent services are not running:
         svc:/system/intrd:default
         svc:/milestone/multi-user-server:default
#

but multi-user is an optional_all on mdmonitor.  Since meta is blocked by 
bind being disabled (and is require_all), isn't mdmonitor satisfying 
optional_all,

      optional_all    Satisfied if the cited services are  running
                      (online or degraded) or will not run without
                      administrative  action  (disabled,   mainte-
                      nance,  not  present, or offline waiting for
                      dependencies which will  not  start  without
                      administrative action).

I'm not sure why mdmonitor isn't online anyways, since it's dependency on 
meta is optional_all as well.  Is there some kind of issue with meta's 
require_all dependency on bind?

This looks a little like 6223370, but that is fixed in NV.

-- Dave

Reply via email to