On 10/31/2014 03:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 14:01:12 +0100
Lennart Poettering <mzerqung(a)0pointer.de> wrote:
> So the problem appears to be that gssproxy.service been ordered before
> remote-fs-pre.target. That target is ordered before
> basic.target. However gssproxy.service also is ordered after
> basic.target (simply because all services by default are ordered
> before basic.target, unless they explicitly specify
> DefaultDependencies=no), hence there's an ordering cycle.
>
> Most likely some NFS maintainers tried to move gss-proxy.service into
> the early boot, and didn't set DefaultDependencies=no.
>
> That said, services running in early boot must be written in a
> specific style (i.e. not assume /var to be around, and suchlike), I
> do wonder if gssproxy is ready for that.
>
> Anyway, long story short: file a bug against the gssproxy package.
I don't think this explains all the problems folks are having with
systemd-217.
I wonder if the new ordering dependency between
systemd-journal-flush.service and systemd-tmpfiles-setup.service
(added in 74055aa76 "journalctl: add new --flush command and make use
of it in systemd-journal-flush.service") participates in the ordering
cycles.