Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix a systemd dependency ("network-online.target") #3086

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 23, 2024

Conversation

schen0x
Copy link
Contributor

@schen0x schen0x commented May 22, 2024

Hi, this PR fixes a problem that the "xrdp.service" fail to auto-start when instructed to listen on a specific interface

  • By changing the "network.target" systemd dependency to "network-online.target"
  • The "network-online.target", in short, means at least one network interface has finished IP level setup.
  • The previously used "network.target" is vague and does not provide such guarantee (ref: man systemd.special(7)).
  • Which often cause "xrdp.service" fail to auto-start when the service is configured to listen on a specific interface (e.g. in xrdp.ini, "port=tcp://192.168.0.1:3389"). Because the interface may have not finish setting up its IP, when "xrdp.service" starts.

- Fix a problem that the xrdp.service fail to auto-start when instructed to listen on a specific interface
- By changing the "network.target" systemd dependency to "network-online.target"
- The "network-online.target", in short, means at least one network interface has finished IP level setup.
- The previously used "network.target" is vague and does not provide such guarantee (ref: man systemd.special(7)).
- Which often cause "xrdp.service" fail to auto-start when the service is configured to listen on a specific interface (e.g. in xrdp.ini, "port=tcp://192.168.0.1:3389"). Because the interface may have not finish setting up its IP, when "xrdp.service" starts.
@matt335672
Copy link
Member

I can see where you're coming from @schen0x

I can see there are no definite guarantees even with this, but it's better than the current state.

For further guarantees, see #1707. I'm waiting on #2974 to be approved before I implement that as there are implications for FreeBSD.

@metalefty - what do you think? LGTM.

@metalefty
Copy link
Member

LGTM, too. @bsmojver added a very similar patch to Fedora package.

@matt335672 matt335672 merged commit de57116 into neutrinolabs:devel May 23, 2024
14 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants