Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Re: "bad" status for genersated target; why?

2019-05-15 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mi, 15.05.19 12:47, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > localhost:~ # systemctl enable usr-local.mount > > > Failed to enable unit: Unit /run/systemd/generator/usr-local.mount is > > > transient or generated. > > > localhost:~ # exit > > > > Hmm? > > > > No? Why? > > You just

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Re: "bad" status for genersated target; why?

2019-05-15 Thread Andrei Borzenkov
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:29 PM Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Mi, 15.05.19 12:25, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:17 PM Lennart Poettering > > wrote: > > > > > > > > To me it's the most horrible part of systemd: Messing with > > > > symlinks...

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Re: "bad" status for genersated target; why?

2019-05-15 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mi, 15.05.19 11:29, Jérémy ROSEN (jeremy.ro...@smile.fr) wrote: > well, in another thread, it was discussed why generated should never have > an install section and why enablement does not make sense for them... > so no it's not a bug. > > Arguably, yes, generators do need to care about

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Re: "bad" status for genersated target; why?

2019-05-15 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 15.05.19 um 11:25 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov: > On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:17 PM Lennart Poettering > wrote: >>> >>> To me it's the most horrible part of systemd: Messing with >>> symlinks... >> >> You should never need to. For all relevant operations there are >> "systemctl" verbs, i.e.

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Re: "bad" status for genersated target; why?

2019-05-15 Thread Jérémy ROSEN
well, in another thread, it was discussed why generated should never have an install section and why enablement does not make sense for them... so no it's not a bug. Arguably, yes, generators do need to care about symlinks, though, maybe the could call "systemctl add-wants --transient" to do the

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Re: "bad" status for genersated target; why?

2019-05-15 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mi, 15.05.19 12:25, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:17 PM Lennart Poettering > wrote: > > > > > > To me it's the most horrible part of systemd: Messing with > > > symlinks... > > > > You should never need to. For all relevant operations there are > >

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Re: "bad" status for genersated target; why?

2019-05-15 Thread Andrei Borzenkov
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:17 PM Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > > To me it's the most horrible part of systemd: Messing with > > symlinks... > > You should never need to. For all relevant operations there are > "systemctl" verbs, i.e. "systemctl enable", "systemctl disable", > "systemctl

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Re: "bad" status for genersated target; why?

2019-05-15 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mi, 15.05.19 10:14, Ulrich Windl (ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de) wrote: > >> >> Why "bad"? > >> > > >> > Again - this has improved in current version which now tells you that > >> > unit is generated. > >> > >> So there's nothing wrong with the unit? The string shown on your version is a

[systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Re: "bad" status for genersated target; why?

2019-05-15 Thread Ulrich Windl
>>> Andrei Borzenkov schrieb am 15.05.2019 um 09:21 in Nachricht : > On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 9:01 AM Ulrich Windl > wrote: >> >> >>> Andrei Borzenkov schrieb am 14.05.2019 um 20:21 in >> Nachricht : >> > 14.05.2019 16:39, Ulrich Windl пишет: >> >> Hi! >> >> >> >> Developing my first systemd