On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 00:18, Marius Tolzmann <tolzm...@molgen.mpg.de> wrote:
>> <snip>
>> disable avahi-daemon.service
>> enable cups.service
>> disable *
>> </snip>
>
> Are all of the files dropped into the system.preset/ directory loaded in
> alphabetic order and then merged? (like udev/rules.d ?)
That's the plan. With the usual logic we also do in udev, that files
with the same name in /etc disable files in /lib.
> Will unit files that lack an [Install] section will be skipped when defining
> 'disable *'? (e.g. all systemd default units etc.)
Services without [Install] will not be handled.
>> If "systemctl preset" is passed with unit names, those units would
>> be enable/disabled as listed in the preset file. If no argument is
>> passed all units would be reset to the preset defaults. (another
>> long-sought feature...)
We will require an argument. There will no 'change all services' logic.
> Am I right that invoking 'systemctl preset' will enable all currently
> disabled services if i do not write a preset file? wouldn't it be better to
> just enable/disable services that are explicitly listed in the preset files
> if no argument is passed?
Same as above, it will not do anything.
> The Distributor/Admin could easily change this to "enable-by-default" by
> adding "enable *".
Yeas, but it will only be applied for future changes for individual services.
> So I can't break my current setup by accidentally invoking 'systemctl
> preset' on purpose 8)
Same as above. We don't want any global focus.
> ('systemctl preset <unit>' should still enable <unit> even if no preset is
> defined at all)
Yes, the default without any config will be calling 'enable'.
Kay
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
