Page MenuHomeVyOS Platform

Systemd reports dependency cycle during boot
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

After introduction of vyos-hostsd.service systemd started to complain about dependency cycle during early boot: Ordering cycle found, skipping LSB: Raise network interfaces, which corresponds to /etc/init.d/networking service

Here is an excerpt from journald:

Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: systemd 215 running in system mode. (+PAM +AUDIT +SELINUX +IMA +SYSVINIT +LIBCRYPTSETUP +GCRYPT +ACL +XZ -SECCOMP -APPARMOR)
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: Detected virtualization 'kvm'.
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: Detected architecture 'x86-64'.
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: Inserted module 'autofs4'
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: Set hostname to <vyos>.
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos kernel: random: systemd-sysv-ge: uninitialized urandom read (16 bytes read)
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos kernel: random: systemd-sysv-ge: uninitialized urandom read (16 bytes read)
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: Cannot add dependency job for unit display-manager.service, ignoring: Unit display-manager.service failed to load: No such file or directory.

Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: Found ordering cycle on basic.target/start
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: Found dependency on sysinit.target/start
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: Found dependency on networking.service/start
Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd[1]: Found dependency on network-pre.target/start

Sep 01 12:48:28 vyos systemd-journal[491]: Journal started
...

The first rolling image with this warning is vyos-1.2-rolling-201908222129-amd64.iso, and persists till today's one vyos-1.2-rolling-201909011324-amd64.iso

Details

Difficulty level
Unknown (require assessment)
Version
-
Why the issue appeared?
Will be filled on close
Is it a breaking change?
Unspecified (possibly destroys the router)

Event Timeline

It should have been fixed by https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/commit/ff05e2a90edf8af5d7b8ad5c69cae2dd40af2c8d It works for me in post-Sep 01 images and I don't see the error in the latest one, but I'm not sure why it would appear in the Sep 01 image if the commit is from Aug 30.

If it re-appears, feel free to reopen.