On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 08:49:32AM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: > Hi! > > It seems "--state=failed" is being ignored silently for "systemctl status" (in version 228). Is this by design? Nope. In 242-1092+ it seems to work fine. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
- From: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 08:05:27 +0000
- Cc: "systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <5D2438FC020000A10003226D@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
- References: <5D2438FC020000A10003226D@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
- Follow-Ups:
- Antw: Re: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
- From: Ulrich Windl
- Antw: Re: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
- References:
- Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
- From: Ulrich Windl
- Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
- Prev by Date: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
- Next by Date: Antw: Re: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
- Previous by thread: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
- Next by thread: Antw: Re: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?
- Index(es):
 |