On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 05:24:16PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > Well, I fudged a little here. You're right that, as written above, nis is > > not guaranteed to start before autofs. Due to a (well-understood and > > recognized) limitation of upstart's current event handling, if the > > 'runlevel' event is seen before 'starting autofs', the subsequent 'starting > > autofs' event will *not* block waiting for nis to be started, and so the > > startup will happen in parallel.
> Which is the problem. Half the time on boot autofs fails to get the maps > from NIS. Ah, it looks to me like this is an out-of-order migration then of the autofs init script to an upstart job when the nis package had yet been converted to upstart. That's a bug in those packages, plain and simple. Seems to have been reported as <https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nis/+bug/569757>. I've corrected this now for the upcoming Precise release. > Well, you are totaly cheating and using a dependency based design to > work around the problem. Heh. I don't think this is cheating at all; it's always been the intent to support this modality in upstart, AFAIK. There are just some cases where the currently available built-in semantics fall short of the mark. > When was wait-for-state introduced? I don't seem to have this on > Lucid. Another of those growing problems? Yes. It was introduced in Ubuntu 11.10. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
