On 1/2/19 12:50 AM, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > Activation by itself guarantees basically nothing.
"Activation" guarantees activation. Activating, for instance, a service unit is quite a bit more significant than "nothing". >> Because, as far as I know, "Requisite=" is completely broken in systemd. > How is it broken? In the case of a service unit Requisite upon the existence of a device unit, systemd will completely ignore the dependency and merrily start the service unit anyway, which, in this case, uselessly attempts to operate upon a nonexistent device. Of course, the service unit will fail, outright, or after time-out, wasting compute resources, and producing lots of otherwise avoidable error messages. I have not really tested Requisite= with other unit type interactions, but then, I also don't know of anyone actually using Requisite= with any other use case. As far as I know, Requisite= is effectively a "no op". In the past, systemd developers have not been especially motivated to fix Requisite=, though without actually declaring "Won't Fix" - more of a "Never Used It Myself, Don't Really Care". _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
