URL: https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/143 Title: #143: Explicitly add ordering dependency for the responders' sockets
lslebodn commented: """ On (28/02/17 13:01), fidencio wrote: >I've talked to Lukáš on the office before replying the email :-) >Anyways, no, it won't be enough. BindsTo and After *must* *go* *together*. >We use BindsTo on all services' sockets and not using After as well may >lead to unexpected behaviour. > The main problem is that commit message is not clear enough and contain unclear statemets e.g. > While debugging the whole breakage reported by Stric I've noticed that > the NSS socket has been starting up the NSS responder _before_ SSSD > being up, leading us to a chaotic situation. What does chaotic situation mean here? There is also a missing context about "BindsTo". >By adding this ordering explicitly we can avoid the reported situation. >Also, it has been recommend by Lukáš Nykrýn that BindsTo and After must >be used together (although it's still not mentioned yet in the systemd >documentation). IIUC "BindsTo" is a stricter relation between units then "Requires" and therefore "After" need to be used to avoid unuexpected/undefined behaviour. LS """ See the full comment at https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/143#issuecomment-283279883
_______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
