[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

autopkgtest-build-lxd failing with bionic

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:52:05AM +0000, Iain Lane wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 09:55:47PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > Hello Iain, all,

> > Iain Lane [2018-02-15 18:48 +0000]:
> > > There's a patch attached here which fixes the problem for me. I'm not
> > > sure if there's a better way to do this - basically it starts
> > > network-online.target and waits for it to become active, with a timeout.
> > > Review appreciated.

> > I wouldn't pick on any of these: network-online.target is a sloppily defined
> > shim for SysV init backwards compatibility, and may not ever get started (in
> > fact, that's the goal ?); and the container might not use networkd, so I
> > wouldn't use s-n-wait-online either. I think querying

> Interesting. I thought that it was the systemd way to say 'I am online
> now' --- i.e. nm-online or systemd-networkd-wait-online, which is the
> question I wanted to get a positive answer to. I can see that the SysV
> implementation isn't great, but it's not clear to me that it was ill
> defined for this case.

> >   [ -n "$(ip route show to 0/0)" ]

> This is better though, and works too. Please take a look at the attached
> patch. Thanks! :-)

Actually no, this is racy, because the route comes up before DNS resolution
is in place.

It's also not forwards-compatible with ipv6-only deploys.

I think the network-online.target is the better thing to key on.

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/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/autopkgtest-devel/attachments/20180216/807c5adc/attachment.sig>

Reply to: