It's actually NetworkManager-dispatcher whose actual job is -if i am not
mistaken- to run some scripts after NetworkManager main process. Though
i have configured NetworkManager-wait-online too but systemd's
parallelizazion is unbeatable: services are started in parallel and i
see other services that i have ordered after dispatcher finishing
starting and dispatcher is still exec'ing my scripts.
On 04/26/2016 01:00 PM, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
Well, this sounds like your service should have some equivalent to
NetworkManager's or systemd-networkd's "wait-until-online" tools.
For example, there's NetworkManager-wait-online.service which blocks
until NM has configured at least one connection fully, so other
services can order against it (usually via network-online.target).
(In fact, this sounds like you're talking about NetworkManager...)
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016, 12:42 george Karakou <mad-proffes...@hotmail.com
<mailto:mad-proffes...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
On 04/26/2016 09:35 AM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 9:27 AM, george Karakou
<mad-proffes...@hotmail.com> <mailto:mad-proffes...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi list, how are you all? I hope everyone is doing well.
I have a long starting unit that executes some(many actually) scripts and
with the parallel nature of systemd init process it doesn't fully start up
before some other units i have starting after it. Meaning "After="
directives in [Unit] section don't fully fill my needs here.
Is there a workaround?
Is Type=oneshot an option?
I understand that this demand somewhat violates the
parallel principle of the systemd init daemon but can it somehow be
serialized?
Thanks for any advice.
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
<mailto:systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
The service is of type dbus and i don't know if i want to break
its functionality(since its a system-service and registers a name
on the bus). But thanks.
On 04/26/2016 10:01 AM, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 9:27 AM, george Karakou
<mad-proffes...@hotmail.com <mailto:mad-proffes...@hotmail.com>>
wrote:
Hi list, how are you all? I hope everyone is doing well.
I have a long starting unit that executes some(many actually)
scripts and with the parallel nature of systemd init process
it doesn't fully start up before some other units i have
starting after it. Meaning "After=" directives in [Unit]
section don't fully fill my needs here.
No, that's *exactly* the case for After= directives. To disable
parallelization for some parts of the boot process, you use
Before= and After= – that's it.
That said, if After=foo.service doesn't work properly, it usually
means foo.service is lying to systemd about when it has "finished
starting". If that's the case, you'd have exactly the same
problems no matter what kind of serialization you try to enable.
If your megascript starts multiple daemons, then maybe it should
be split into several independent .service units, one for each
daemon? If that's not acceptable, try changing it to Type=notify,
and make it use `systemd-notify READY=1` once it's done.
--
Mantas Mikulėnas <graw...@gmail.com <mailto:graw...@gmail.com>>
This service is vital for the networking part since it adds
interfaces to bridge, adds static arp entries and some other stuff
and the point is to have all this networking initialization in a
central unit and then start everything else, after the interfaces
have been "upped". And since it is a dbus service i don't know if
i want to "break" it's functionality. Anyway i don't see anything
severely broken, like firewalls complaining of non-existent
interfaces after they have initialized, so i am aknowledging this
as not so high priority and i therefor thank you both.
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
