On Fri, 25.01.13 10:25, Matthew Miller (mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:53:02AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > c) Or you could list them as "Wants=" dependency in your service unit's
> > [Service] section. That means that whenever your service unit is
> > started, your time unit is too. No need for preset file changes.
> > I think c) is the best choice if it makes little sense to ever run the
> > service without the timer unit. It makes things very robust.
> >
>
> In this case, if the service is disabled ("masked", in the new terminology),
> would the timer still run, or does an inverse relationship need to also be
> spelled-out?
Masking makes a unit entirely unavailable to the system, and that
includes its dependencies.
It does make sense however for the timer unit to carry a BindTo= for the
service unit it belongs to, so that the timer unit goes away
automatically when the service unit is stopped.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
