Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-16 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Tue, 08.03.11 21:23, Andrey Borzenkov ([email protected]) wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:00 AM, Lennart Poettering > wrote: > > What about this solution consisting of these 4 rules together: > > > > 1. A service residing in /lib with no [Install] section will > >   unconditionally be con

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-08 Thread Andrey Borzenkov
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:00 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > What about this solution consisting of these 4 rules together: > > 1. A service residing in /lib with no [Install] section will >   unconditionally be considered enabled. > 2. A service which has at least one symlink to it in /etc is cons

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-08 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Tue, 08.03.11 19:16, Andrey Borzenkov ([email protected]) wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Lennart Poettering > wrote: > > On Sat, 05.03.11 14:27, Andrey Borzenkov ([email protected]) wrote: > > > >> pts/1}% systemctl --no-pager show systemd-tmpfiles-clean.service > >> Id=systemd-tm

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-08 Thread Andrey Borzenkov
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Sat, 05.03.11 14:27, Andrey Borzenkov ([email protected]) wrote: > >> pts/1}% systemctl --no-pager show systemd-tmpfiles-clean.service >> Id=systemd-tmpfiles-clean.service >> Names=systemd-tmpfiles-clean.service >> Wants=local-fs.targe

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-07 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mon, 07.03.11 22:13, Andrey Borzenkov ([email protected]) wrote: > > For the latter we generate a warning currently, telling the user that > > the service has no [Install] section. > > > >> Am I missing something? Is there a different command that should be used? > >> It seems a more full imple

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-07 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mon, 07.03.11 14:55, Bill Nottingham ([email protected]) wrote: > > Lennart Poettering ([email protected]) said: > > > In my head, I was thinking 'targets that are included by default.target'. > > > So, on a 'normal' install, that would be graphical, multi-user, local-fs, > > > basic, e

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-07 Thread Bill Nottingham
Lennart Poettering ([email protected]) said: > > In my head, I was thinking 'targets that are included by default.target'. > > So, on a 'normal' install, that would be graphical, multi-user, local-fs, > > basic, etc. > > > > If you wanted a different target, you could say (for example): > >

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-07 Thread Andrey Borzenkov
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:00 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Fri, 04.03.11 14:51, Bill Nottingham ([email protected]) wrote: > >> The implementation of the is-enabled command makes its not necessarily >> useful as I might expect it to be. From looking at it, it merely checks >> whether the '[In

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-07 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mon, 07.03.11 13:43, Bill Nottingham ([email protected]) wrote: > > Lennart Poettering ([email protected]) said: > > > That means that it's not going to be correct for any service that has > > > been enabled via other means, or doesn't have an '[Install]' section. > > > > For the latte

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-07 Thread Bill Nottingham
Lennart Poettering ([email protected]) said: > > That means that it's not going to be correct for any service that has > > been enabled via other means, or doesn't have an '[Install]' section. > > For the latter we generate a warning currently, telling the user that > the service has no [Ins

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-06 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Sat, 05.03.11 14:27, Andrey Borzenkov ([email protected]) wrote: > pts/1}% systemctl --no-pager show systemd-tmpfiles-clean.service > Id=systemd-tmpfiles-clean.service > Names=systemd-tmpfiles-clean.service > Wants=local-fs.target > Before=sysinit.target shutdown.target > After=systemd-tmpfiles

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-06 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Fri, 04.03.11 14:51, Bill Nottingham ([email protected]) wrote: > The implementation of the is-enabled command makes its not necessarily > useful as I might expect it to be. From looking at it, it merely checks > whether the '[Install]' section has been executed. That is true. > That means

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-05 Thread Andrey Borzenkov
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > The implementation of the is-enabled command makes its not necessarily > useful as I might expect it to be. From looking at it, it merely checks > whether the '[Install]' section has been executed. That means that it's > not going to be cor

[systemd-devel] systemctl is-enabled...

2011-03-04 Thread Bill Nottingham
The implementation of the is-enabled command makes its not necessarily useful as I might expect it to be. From looking at it, it merely checks whether the '[Install]' section has been executed. That means that it's not going to be correct for any service that has been enabled via other means, or do