On Mo, 24.10.22 12:24, Ulrich Windl (ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de) wrote:
> >>> Andrei Borzenkov <arvidj...@gmail.com> schrieb am 24.10.2022 um 10:26 in > Nachricht > <caa91j0w3t5a-1mnpaehrhg3dubyu0ejlpl3x0jvmvpdfsrb...@mail.gmail.com>: > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 9:48 AM Ulrich Windl > > <ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote: > >> > >> >>> Alex Aminoff <amin...@nber.org> schrieb am 21.10.2022 um 18:11 in > >> >>> Nachricht > >> <c6daef42-ee08-0293-e198-8362691a3...@nber.org>: > >> > >> ... > >> > Just to close out this thread, I am happy to report that > >> > > >> > ExecStart=systemctl start --no-block multi-user.target > >> > > >> > worked great. > >> > >> Makes me wonder: How does systemd handle indirect recursive starts (like > >> the > > one shown)? > >> > > > > What do you call a "recursive start"? "systemctl start" simply tells > > starting multi-user.target via ExecStart=systemctl start starts all depending > units, and probably one of those starts the multi-user.target again. > That's what I call recursive. If you enqueue a unit for starting while it is already enqueued for starting this has no effect. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Berlin
