On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 04:16:52PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > On 1/25/18 3:44 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> Ok this seems batshit crazy, no offense. I don't blame /you/ ;) You pointed me > >> at http://refspecs.linuxbase.org/LSB_2.0.1/LSB-PDA/LSB-PDA/iniscrptact.html > >> but it says that the /initscript/ should exit with specific codes, not that > >> the application it /calls/ should do so. > > Yes. At the moment, the systemd service calls xfs_scrub directly, hence > > it interprets the return code as an initscript error code. So in theory > > we could create a wrapper script that does all the is_service junk, but > > now that's another weird little script to break. On the plus side we'd > > contain the systemd workaround crap to some random wrapper in /usr/lib. > > > > Ok, I'll think about it. > > > > does LSB even have anything to do w/ systemd behavior or have they reinvented > all that by now? :( I think systemd is mostly following LSB here, though they give us the flexibility to screw things up. > FWIW, > > https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.service.html > > says that you can define: > > SuccessExitStatus= > > Takes a list of exit status definitions that, when returned by the main service process, will be considered successful termination > > does that help? No. The xfs_scrub_fail@ service is only invoked if the service fails, so if we use SuccessExitStatus= to remap the scrub problem error codes to "success" then systemd considers the service to have succeeded and won't start the _fail service. --D > > -Eric > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
