Hi Robie - I remember the old discussions and the tag, In this
particular case I think it is somewhat special because.

a) This isn't a Ubuntu decision - upstream of the package/functionality
goes this way, so if challenged one should challenge it there. So if we
want to we should do it there.

b) This one is also different as it isn't a service that your system
"consumes" like root-iscsi or anything like it - there we'd get "my boot
hangs". But in this case this exists to "provide" services to others. I
know that there are others that have problems, e.g. things that fail to
bind on an interface as they reject to listen to netlink to "bind later
once available". But if this ends up as case-by-case decision

c) I remember a few of the old incarnations of this discussion, but it
already has become a (use)case-by-case decision throughout various
packages and services. Some clearly work best with After=network-online,
some are clearly degraded with it - and sadly there are some in between
which are either way depending on the sourrounding HW/Setup/Use-Case.
Have a look at the growing list of packages that have implemented it
that way - https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=After.*network-
online&literal=0

Based on that IMHO I think:
- the change for Hirsute is right
- it might be right to challenge it (to be sure about this particular case), 
but then let us do so at upstream nfs-utils
- I agree that for an SRU the potential regressions might be too much and there 
users can configure it accordingly

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1918141

Title:
  nfs-server.service needs name resolution and network online

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nfs-utils/+bug/1918141/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to