[arch-projects] [netctl][PATCH] Support dynamically appearing interfaces

Jouke Witteveen j.witteveen at gmail.com
Fri Feb 15 07:31:12 EST 2013

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org> wrote:
> Am 15.02.2013 13:11, schrieb Jouke Witteveen:
>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org> wrote:
>>> Am 15.02.2013 12:43, schrieb Jouke Witteveen:
>>>> Another option is to add everything to network.target.wants.
>>> Nope. network.target is not started by default and is quite mysterious
>>> anyway.
>> It is perhaps more understandable if network.target just wants all
>> activated network configurations and multi-user.target wants
>> network.target.
> This isn't the case. network.target is ONLY activated when any service
> has Wants=/After=network.target to synchronize itself after the network
> start. All network services ususally have Before=network.target, without
> Wants= or Requires=. In short, network.target is only used as a
> synchronization point for services that require the network to be up.

This implies we should drop
from netctl at .service and netctl-auto at .service.

>>>> Although
>>>> that might be a better place, it doesn't really solve the initial
>>>> problem. On the other hand: what is precisely the problem: the unit
>>>> just times out and is not supposed to block anything.
>>> How is that related to the topic?
>> Part of the problem of Ivan Shapovalov I do not understand. If a
>> profile is enabled and the interface does not appear, this should not
>> delay anything.
> If a network interface doesn't appear and a network profile using it is
> activated, the service will wait for it until a timeout. This blocks the
> completion of multi-user.target. This likely won't be visible, but is
> undesirable.

Is this a consequence of DefaultDependencies=true (by default)?
Otherwise, the netctl units do not enforce an ordering with regard to

More information about the arch-projects mailing list