Re: Antw: Re: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 10:23:47AM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> >>> Zbigniew Jedrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb am 09.07.2019 um
> 10:05
> in Nachricht <20190709080527.GK17099@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > 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.
> 
> In v228 is is effective for "list-units", but not for "status"...

Oh, right. I checked "list-units", but not "status".
"systemctl status 'systemd*' --state=running" and
"systemctl status 'systemd*' --state=failed" both seem to do the
right thing here.

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