[Users] host deploy and after reboot not responsive

[Alon Bar-Lev]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken at redhat.com>
> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl at redhat.com>
> Cc: "Adam Litke" <agl at us.ibm.com>, "users" <users at ovirt.org>, "Gianluca Cecchi" <gianluca.cecchi at gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 12:37:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [Users] host deploy and after reboot not responsive
> 
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 05:16:09AM -0500, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Dan Kenigsberg" <danken at redhat.com>
> > > To: "Gianluca Cecchi" <gianluca.cecchi at gmail.com>
> > > Cc: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl at redhat.com>, "Adam Litke"
> > > <agl at us.ibm.com>, "users" <users at ovirt.org>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 12:09:59 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Users] host deploy and after reboot not responsive
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:57:03AM +0100, Gianluca Cecchi wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Dan Kenigsberg  wrote:
> > > > > Gianluca, how about softening our ntpd requirement with
> > > > > something
> > > > > like
> > > > > http://gerrit.ovirt.org/11291 ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Could you verify that it's working on your system?
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, I can test the change the service modification for vdsmd.
> > > > I presume you want me to test it with default fedora 18, so
> > > > chronyd
> > > > enabled and ntpd disabled, correct?
> > > 
> > > Yes. though my patch may generate excessive noise, with its
> > > attempt
> > > to
> > > start two conflicting service. I suppose that we can/should
> > > "want"
> > > only
> > > chrony. But please provide your input.
> > 
> > We should use either, and default.
> 
> I'm not sure that I parse your English properly. Could you be more
> explict, preferably in a code review of
> http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/11291/ ?

I guess this will work, however this is primitive approach that a service should explicitly state the service provider in multi-option configuration.

Let's assume there is yet another alternative to ntpd, then all services should have three alternatives...

And what if I add my own alternative to my system? then I need to manually fix all services... as the authors of these were not aware of the new service I introduce.

It is systemd I don't like...

> 
> > On none systemd other distributions there is the concept of
> > 'provides'.
> > This means that a service like vdsmd can depend on timesync and a
> > service like chronyd *AND* ntpd provide timesync.
> > This is kind of logical name for service.
> > Also other non systemd distributions provides the ability to script
> > the dependencies.
> > 
> > I could not find either of he above methods in systemd
> > documentation.
>