[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

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

[systemd-devel] Apparmor and ureadhead failed to start

Dear IT worker, Since I have kernel 4.14.12 I have two errors : apparmor failed because It failed to start LSB the status exit code is 123 and there is a error by program /etc/apparmor.d/usr.lib.snapd-confine.real in line 11 unable to open /var/lib/snapd/apparmor/snap-confine.d (skipping

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

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] Apparmor and ureadhead failed to start

Hello Dorian, Dorian ROSSE [2018-01-10 9:35 +]: > Since I have kernel 4.14.12 I have two errors : > > apparmor failed because It failed to start LSB the status exit code is 123 > and there is a error by program /etc/apparmor.d/usr.lib.snapd-confine.real in > line 11 unable to open

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

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

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

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 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

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

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

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

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