Comment 301 for bug 554172

On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 15:13 +0000, Mike Bianchi wrote:
> We users are NOT experts in the Launchpad rules and regulations.
> We just want our problems addressed.
>
> Please do whatever is necessary to open up a bug that addresses the
> long standing and still present condition of init scripts not being executed
> reliably.
>
> For "Title" and "Description" I propose:
>
> Boot service starts are sometimes, randomly, unreliable.
> Execution of /etc/init/* and /etc/init.d/* boot scripts sometimes fail.
>
>
> Since the introduction of the upstart version of /bin/init we continue
> see unreliable boot sequences where it appears boot scripts in
> /etc/init/ and /etc/init.d/ are not always executed to completion.
>
> Bug #554172, Comment #295 2011-02-12
> "... in a fresh 10.10 install (both 32 and 64bit). init.d
> services are not always started. eg. hostapd and sabnzbdplus."
>
> It is crucial to note that evidence suggests
> the behavior is somewhat random, and
> that it appears to be more prevalent on multi-core processors.
>
> This bug was once thought to be based on the "console output" stanza in
> /etc/init/*.conf noted in Bug #554172 and duplicates, but ongoing
> evidence is that the problem has not been completely solved.
>
>
> I ask this based on the following observations from this bug (#554172) ...
>
> > John Edwards wrote on 2011-02-12: #293
> > Jens Schødt, this bug is in the kernel console device not being writeable
> > early enough in the boot.
>
> This bug's Description starts with:
> "Cups is not loading on my machine at boot, must run sudo /etc/init.d/cups
> start to after booting to print."
>
> It became titled 'system services using "console output" not starting at boot'
> later on when that seemed to be the root cause of all the problems.
>
> While the "console output" fix improved the situation it obviously is not
> the complete solution.
>

Mike, sorry about my earlier reply, some of it got cut off by how
launchpad handles quoted email. Steve said some of what I was saying.

The request to create a new bug report, marking it as possibly related,
is a common practice and it has proven useful in the past to get things
fixed.

Right now the issue that was reported originally is definitely fixed
from the point of view of many of those who reported they were affected
by it, and from the point of view of the developer(s?) who found and
applied a fix.

Some of the duplicates/comments may not be related to what was fixed
there, but its not helpful to anyone to keep pounding on this bug
report, even if some of the original reporters were actually not this
bug.

So I agree with Steve, and recommend that users who are affected by a
similar problem (even if its not easily or predictably reproducible),
report a new bug, and post here saying "I reported bug X, possibly
related to this one".

Then users experiencing this problem will see that comment, go to that
bug, and possibly see that their issues are more closely related to that
problem, and hopefully help by adding some data points which developers
can use to reproduce the issue and fix it.