Actually, no, that doesn't work for me. Was expecting it would given the comments on the samba bug, but, well, no. It *does* work to send HUP once booted:
rene@t5500:~$ ping WD-NETCENTER
ping: WD-NETCENTER: Name or service not known
rene@t5500:~$ sudo kill -HUP $(systemctl show winbind -p MainPID --value)
rene@t5500:~$ ping WD-NETCENTER
PING WD-NETCENTER (192.168.1.33) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from fs7-netcenter (192.168.1.33): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.86 ms
It seems the networkd-dispatcher script is still too early.
Must by the way also admit I'd maybe not consider it a better workaround even it if did work than just waiting for network-online.target; nmbd as mentioned already does as well, so only people with minimal Windows-networking needs or wants would get any potential benefit from NOT simply waiting for network-online.target.
Actually, no, that doesn't work for me. Was expecting it would given the comments on the samba bug, but, well, no. It *does* work to send HUP once booted:
rene@t5500:~$ ping WD-NETCENTER
ping: WD-NETCENTER: Name or service not known
rene@t5500:~$ sudo kill -HUP $(systemctl show winbind -p MainPID --value)
rene@t5500:~$ ping WD-NETCENTER
PING WD-NETCENTER (192.168.1.33) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from fs7-netcenter (192.168.1.33): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.86 ms
It seems the networkd-dispatcher script is still too early.
Must by the way also admit I'd maybe not consider it a better workaround even it if did work than just waiting for network- online. target; nmbd as mentioned already does as well, so only people with minimal Windows-networking needs or wants would get any potential benefit from NOT simply waiting for network- online. target.