Unexpected behaviour not noticed by systemctl command

[Maksim Fomin <maxim@xxxxxxxxx>]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday, 7 October 2019 г., 13:48, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
>
> Am 07.10.19 um 12:43 schrieb Andy Pieters:
>
> > Just lately ran into a fumble. I was trying to stop and disable a
> > service and I typed in:
> > systemctl stop --now example.service
>
> but nowehere "disable" is statet with that command
>
> > The service duly stopped but wasn't disabled because the --now switch
> > is only applicable on the disable/enable/mask commands
>
> yes, it "executes the state" instead just disable it for the next boot
> but "stop now" don't imply a different behavior as "stop" unless there
> would be some timing to exectue "stop" by default which isn't
>
> > However, shouldn't it be good practice to produce a warning or an
> > error when a switch is used that has no effect?
>
> it is used, it is stoppednow
>
> systemd-devel mailing list
> systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel

I guess he means accepting '-now' by 'systemctl stop' is a bug.
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel