Uoti Urpala <[email protected]> writes: > but as I said at the end of > https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2013/12/msg00206.html there's an > automatic "Before:" dependency created from sockets to identically named > services. So it shouldn't be necessary to give it explicitly.
Ah! You did say this, and I forgot. Thank you, that answers my remaining question about the dependency ordering. It would be good to get this explicitly documented somewhere. I should probably open a bug on systemd for the documentation issues we discussed during this thread. > If you want to make sure your service never tries to start without > socket activation, it should have Requires=foo.socket; none of the > default relations are strong enough to strictly prohibit starting > without a socket. I think at least the case where creating the socket > fails and admin manually says "systemctl start foo.service" would always > start the service without a socket otherwise. Yes, that matches my experience. Adding Requires= fixed that case. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
