Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Thanks for your exhaustive reply, Jonathon. On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 04:02:47AM +0530, Jonathon Kowalski wrote: > [...] > I think systemctl should do something similar to that, internally > create a transient target unit through manager's bus API, add Wants= > (which gives it implicit After=) on

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

So I have a comment on the issue, but it's been quite a lot of time since then (and I happen to know more about systemd than I did back then). I think this feature is just working around problems in units, and introducing more complexity for little gain, in particular, while StartUnits vectorized

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

(Bringing up an older one.) On 1/15/18 2:20 AM, 林自均 wrote: > I've filed https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/7877 for this. There's also accompanying RFE at [1]. I've looked into that and arrived at design/implementation crossroads. I'd be happy for any ideas/feedback on that GH issue.

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Hi Lennart, I've filed https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/7877 for this. Thanks for explain the reason of not document this in the first place. John Lin 2018-01-13 0:41 GMT+08:00 Lennart Poettering : > On Do, 11.01.18 17:52, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi)

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Fr, 12.01.18 00:47, 林自均 (johnl...@gmail.com) wrote: > How about adding an "--order" option to systemctl? With this option, > systemctl will sort those units by ordering dependencies before submitting > them. Although I personally wanted this to be the default behavior, I can > understand

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Am 12.01.2018 um 17:49 schrieb Lennart Poettering: On Fr, 12.01.18 10:13, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote: Am 12.01.2018 um 08:12 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov: On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: come on - nobody cares about this

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Do, 11.01.18 17:24, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote: > Ordering dependencies are between jobs. To have any effect here > systemd must have both start jobs queued concurrently. What is > unexpected is that multiple services are apparently submitted as > individual independent jobs,

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Do, 11.01.18 21:41, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote: > > Am 11.01.2018 um 20:27 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov: > > 11.01.2018 21:56, Reindl Harald пишет: > > > > > > it complete unexpected nonsense when i have two services which have a > > > clear start ordering > > > > "services

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Do, 11.01.18 17:52, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote: > At boot, both would be started as part of the same transaction (same > would happen here if you started a third.service that depended on both > first.service and second.service, then second.service would always > wait). Here

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

eOn Do, 11.01.18 22:30, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote: > 11.01.2018 22:04, Mantas Mikulėnas пишет: > > > > It could, if there was an API call to start multiple jobs at once. > > (Actually, isn't there one already?...) > > > > None I can find in sources. There is none. There was

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Fr, 12.01.18 10:13, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote: > Am 12.01.2018 um 08:12 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov: > > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Reindl Harald > > wrote: > > > > > > come on - nobody cares about this bullshit bingo about what are jobs, > >

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Am 12.01.2018 um 09:55 schrieb Michael Chapman: On Fri, 12 Jan 2018, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: And why does it matter? If unit A can be started without unit B, why does it matter in which order they are started? If unit A can *not* be started without unit B, it must tell so using Requires or

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > come on - nobody cares about this bullshit bingo about what are jobs, units > and services > I naively believe that understanding software design and how software works is helpful when discussing said software.

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 7:51 AM, 林自均 wrote: > Hi Andrei, > >> If unit A can be started without unit B, why does it matter in which order >> they are started? > > Are you suggesting that After=/Before= must come with Requires= or similar? What I say is - After/Before is only

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Fri, 12 Jan 2018, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: 12.01.2018 03:47, 林自均 пишет: How about adding an "--order" option to systemctl? With this option, systemctl will sort those units by ordering dependencies before submitting them. And why does it matter? If unit A can be started without unit B, why

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Do, 11.01.18 10:59, 林自均 (johnl...@gmail.com) wrote: > Hi folks, > > I have 2 service unist: first.service and second.service. I configured > "After=first.service" in second.service. Both services are "Type=oneshot". > > If I execute: > > # systemctl start first.service second.service > >

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

I had a quick look at the systemd dbus API (which I assume is close to what systemctl uses) and there are no easy way to queue multiple "starts" into one job There is a single StartUnit (+varient) method which can only take a single unit. no queuing mechanism, way to create ajob without

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 at 21:41:54 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > come on - nobody cares about this bullshit bingo about what are jobs, units > and services Please try to be polite when you are in a situation where you could be perceived as representing a community. Responses like this to discussion

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Am 12.01.2018 um 08:12 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov: On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: come on - nobody cares about this bullshit bingo about what are jobs, units and services I naively believe that understanding software design and how software

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Am 12.01.2018 um 04:59 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov: 12.01.2018 03:47, 林自均 пишет: How about adding an "--order" option to systemctl? With this option, systemctl will sort those units by ordering dependencies before submitting them. And why does it matter? If unit A can be started without unit

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Hi Andrei, > If unit A can be started without unit B, why does it matter in which order they are started? Are you suggesting that After=/Before= must come with Requires= or similar? I think this breaks the design of making ordering dependencies and requirement dependencies orthogonal. Take

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

12.01.2018 03:47, 林自均 пишет: > How about adding an "--order" option to systemctl? With this option, > systemctl will sort those units by ordering dependencies before submitting > them. And why does it matter? If unit A can be started without unit B, why does it matter in which order they are

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

How about adding an "--order" option to systemctl? With this option, systemctl will sort those units by ordering dependencies before submitting them. Although I personally wanted this to be the default behavior, I can understand comparability matters. John Lin Reindl Harald

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Am 11.01.2018 um 20:27 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov: 11.01.2018 21:56, Reindl Harald пишет: it complete unexpected nonsense when i have two services which have a clear start ordering "services start ordering" is fundamental misconception. Ordering exists between jobs, not units. Unfortunately,

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

11.01.2018 21:56, Reindl Harald пишет: > > it complete unexpected nonsense when i have two services which have a > clear start ordering "services start ordering" is fundamental misconception. Ordering exists between jobs, not units. Unfortunately, systemd documentation does very little to

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Am 11.01.2018 um 20:30 schrieb Andrei Borzenkov: 11.01.2018 22:04, Mantas Mikulėnas пишет: It could, if there was an API call to start multiple jobs at once. (Actually, isn't there one already?...) None I can find in sources (fdo is down for me currently) who cares about fdo when it's

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

11.01.2018 22:04, Mantas Mikulėnas пишет: > > It could, if there was an API call to start multiple jobs at once. > (Actually, isn't there one already?...) > None I can find in sources (fdo is down for me currently). ___ systemd-devel mailing list

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 20:11 Uoti Urpala wrote: > On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 15:34 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 11.01.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Uoti Urpala: > > > I'd guess this is due to systemctl starting each listed unit > > > independently rather than as a single

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Am 11.01.2018 um 16:52 schrieb Uoti Urpala: On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 15:34 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 11.01.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Uoti Urpala: I'd guess this is due to systemctl starting each listed unit independently rather than as a single transaction. Thus, the second version first starts

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 15:34 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 11.01.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Uoti Urpala: > > I'd guess this is due to systemctl starting each listed unit > > independently rather than as a single transaction. Thus, the second > > version first starts second.service without

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Am 11.01.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Uoti Urpala: On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 10:59 +, 林自均 wrote: I have 2 service unist: first.service and second.service. I configured "After=first.service" in second.service. Both services are "Type=oneshot". If I execute: # systemctl start first.service

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 10:59 +, 林自均 wrote: > I have 2 service unist: first.service and second.service. I > configured "After=first.service" in second.service. Both services are > "Type=oneshot". > > If I execute: > > # systemctl start first.service second.service > > The ordering dependency

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:59 PM, 林自均 wrote: > Hi folks, > > I have 2 service unist: first.service and second.service. I configured > "After=first.service" in second.service. Both services are "Type=oneshot". > > If I execute: > > # systemctl start first.service second.service

[systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

Hi folks, I have 2 service unist: first.service and second.service. I configured "After=first.service" in second.service. Both services are "Type=oneshot". If I execute: # systemctl start first.service second.service The ordering dependency will work, i.e. second.service will start after