Hi, On 13-06-18 17:05, Zbigniew JÄ?drzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 04:55:27PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 12-06-18 19:11, Lennart Poettering wrote: >>> On Di, 12.06.18 11:33, Hans de Goede (hdegoede at redhat.com) wrote: >>>> AFAIK the service actually doing the updates is supposed to call >>>> systemctl reboot --force when it is done, so any targets after >>>> system-update.target won't get started ? >>> >>> True, the service in question could split the reboot call of course, >>> if it wanted, so that you can plug things in between. >> >> Since in this case we want to increment a boot_indeterminate counter >> to indicate the last boot was not a normal boot, so no clear >> success status is available I'm fine with the service doing the >> increment before the updates run. >> >> So I was thinking about adding a system-update-pre.target >> and then in system-update.target add: >> >> Wants=system-update-pre.target >> After=system-update-pre.target > Yep, that sounds reasonable. So one more question about this, as discussed in the pull-req, updates services being linked from system-update.target.wants now need a "After=system-update-pre.target" in their .service files. I plan to file bugs against the existing .service files there for this (*). Will those service files potentially having After=system-update-pre.target on systems with an older systemd which does not have that target be a problem, or will systemd just ignore this? Regards, Hans *) and in the case of fwupd-offline-update.service also to add: DefaultDependencies=false Requires=sysinit.target After=sysinit.target Which it is all missing