On Mon, 09.12.13 11:33, Thomas Bächler (tho...@archlinux.org) wrote: > Am 07.12.2013 22:29, schrieb Robert Milasan: > > From systemd-analyze dump: > > > > Wants: systemd-udevd.service > > WantedBy: lvm2-activation-early.service > > WantedBy: lvm2-activation.service > > Before: lvm2-activation-early.service > > Before: sysinit.target > > After: systemd-udev-trigger.service > > After: systemd-journald.socket > > References: systemd-udevd.service > > References: systemd-udev-trigger.service > > References: sysinit.target > > References: systemd-journald.socket > > ReferencedBy: lvm2-activation-early.service > > ReferencedBy: lvm2-activation.service > > What's the distribution you are using? Using udevadm settle for lvm is a > waste of boot time and isn't even guaranteed to work (ask Lennart, Kay > or Greg K-H for the full speech). It's a hackish workaround for LVM's > inability to activate volumes automatically.
afaik on very recent fedora lvm has been fixed to now require udevadm settle anymore, one of my favourite issues with LVM is gone now... That said I have not looked into it in detail, so I don't know if this is all good now. (I sure I won't let LVM anywhere near my systems...) (What I did see though is that they still use a pair of FIFOs as daemon IPC. Which doesn't really enhance my trust in the new LVM code that much.) Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
