On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 06:52:04AM +0400, Andrey Borzenkov wrote: > В Fri, 13 Jun 2014 16:41:04 +0200 > Werner Fink <wer...@suse.de> пишет: > > > From: arvidj...@gmail.com > > > > will terminate emergency.service due to implicit dependencies on > > basic.target > > and therefore sysinit.target which in turn conflict with emergency.target. > > > > I always considered it as a stopgap not suitable for upstream. But I > still do not know what can be done to fix it. > > It still looks rather wrong that any arbitrary service can displace > the whole run-level. May be we need counterpart for RefuseManualStart > so that some targets can only be displaced manually, not as result of > implicit dependency. Agreed. We cannot play whack-a-mole like this, there's simply too many units which seemingly randomly change the "runlevel".
Zbyszek _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
