Re: ExecStartPre checking conf

[Uoti Urpala <uoti.urpala@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2019-05-20 at 11:56 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> about that though). Using ExecStartPre= for a syntax checker appears
> pretty pointless to me, as yes, you just end up doing the same work
> twice, and you might as well have the ExecStart= fail rather than the
> ExecStartPre=, there's little benefit in that.

I've seen people prefer type=forking over type=simple for the sake of
checking syntax before starting *depending* units. I'm not particularly
convinced myself that this is valuable, but whatever it's worth,
ExecStartPre should achieve the same goal (depending units are not
started if syntax check fails).


_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel