Am 08.10.2014 um 20:28 schrieb Damien Robert:
> Thomas Bächler  wrote in message <543579d1.4010...@archlinux.org>:
>> I don't care what upstream recommends, there is no reason for this
>> target to exist and there is no reason to use it. Things get even worse,
>> since you cannot order the unit After=something - since timers.target
>> pulls the unit, it gets an implicit ordering Before=timers.target,
>> removing lots of flexibility with regards to ordering (since
>> timers.target is before sysinit.target).
> 
> I don't really care about timers.target, but shouldn't the dependency be
> put in the corresponding services files rather than in the timers? I
> personally see timers as similar to sockets files, essentially trivial to
> launch, all the work being done in the services files.

The point with sockets and paths has been made clear in the original
systemd blog post:

You first set up all socket and path units, then you can start all
daemons in parallel without caring for ordering. That is why there is a
strict ordering between sockets/paths and normal services.

Timers fulfill no such requirement. They are supposed to be started
whenever the init system can do it.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to