I submitted bug #785253
<https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=785253>.

We'll see where it goes...
---
*B. R.*

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 10:21 PM, B.R. <reallfqq-deb...@yahoo.fr> wrote:

> Well I am conservative on the sysvinit stuff.
> The more I read bout systemd the more fearsome it appears to me.
>
> I guess eventually I won't have a choice to move towards it.
> Great ideas go along with unjustifiable crap there.
>
> Maybe systemd handles event-based stuff better?
> ---
> *B. R.*
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Bob Proulx <b...@proulx.com> wrote:
>
>> B.R. wrote:
>> > I managed to solve the problem with some help from debian IRC channel.
>>
>> Great!  Glad to hear you have it solved.
>>
>> > The problem lied in the /etc/network/interfaces, where my eth0 interface
>> > was set up with the 'allow-hotplug' directive.
>> > Still wondering why I ever did that... oO
>>
>> Both 'auto' and 'allow-hotplug' should work.  The general movement by
>> the-powers-that-be are to move everything to the event driven hotplug
>> interfaces.  Therefore it *should* work.  But obviously the
>> synchronous boot time init is the one that has been traditionally used
>> and the most well tested.  The event driven interface is getting
>> rewritten and the default for Jessie just changed to it.  Basically
>> everything is different in the new Jessie using the defaults.
>>
>> > In short, that allowed the interface to be declared 'mounted' while
>> still
>> > unavailable. Services requiring the network to be up were then confused
>> and
>> > reported heavy errors. nginx was one of those.
>> > Reverting to the standard 'auto' solved the problem and the dependency
>> is
>> > now met.
>>
>> Since this *should* work and you have a failing test case where it
>> does not I encourage you to file a bug report on it.  Unfortunately I
>> am not sure which package should get the bug.  Plus it depends upon
>> some other specifics of your configuration.  But I think it definitely
>> warrants getting a bug filed against it.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>
>

Reply via email to