В Tue, 08 Jul 2014 14:37:19 +0200 Steffen Sledz <[email protected]> пишет:
> On 08.07.2014 14:22, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Tue, 08.07.14 14:11, Steffen Sledz ([email protected]) wrote: > >> There is one more open question. We did not found a *clear* definition > >> (e.g. a state diagram) of all the states a unit can have. > > > > Yeah, I tried to avoid documenting this in too much detail, since we > > wanted to have the freedom to still alter the state machine if we need > > to. > > > >> e.g. What is the criteria for a service to change from *activating* to > >> *active/started*? > > > > That depends on the service Type= you have chosen, and whether you have > > ExecStartPre= and/or ExecStartPost= commands for your service. "Active" > > is entered basically after everything needed to start up a service is > > executed plus the service has reported back that it is up. "Everything > > needed" means ExecStartPre= and ExecStartPost= having been executed. And > > the "reporting back" refers to the notification logic you chose with > > Type=. See systemd.service(5) for more information about that. > > > > Hope that makes some sense? > > Also this manpage is not fully clear. E.g. if we have to *simple* services A > and B with an After= between them. > > What is the criteria that A changes from *activating* to *active* and B can > start? > If there are ExecStartPost - once they finish execution. If there are not - once program from ExecStart is launched (actually, once it is forked - I do not see how systemd can wait until it is actually execed). _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
