On Wed, 26.03.14 21:50, Kai Hendry (hen...@webconverger.com) wrote: > > Thanks Michael for answering, :) > > On 26 March 2014 18:59, Michael Biebl <mbi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2014-03-26 3:56 GMT+01:00 Kai Hendry <hen...@webconverger.com>: > > If your daemon is not functional if the hardware is not present, I'd > > probably start it via a udev rule and SYSTEMD_WANTS. > > Do you have an example for this please? > > I don't quite understand why I can't I just name the device in the > service file. Why does it have to be so confusing. Still don't > understand the need for escaping... is there a need?
Well, on the command line we will actually escape automatically for you, i.e. "systemctl status /dev/sda5" will magically turn into "systemctl status dev-sda5.device". However, we make stricter requirements when writing unit files to avoid redundant syntaxes, and we should expect the admin to take a little more care... I think this is the right behaviour as it is OK to be a bit more sloppy (and hence user-friendly) for day-to-day command lines, and require more correctness when writing new files. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
