On Thu, 2021-02-04 at 22:16 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > 03.02.2021 22:25, Benjamin Berg пишет: > > Requires= actually has the difference that the unit must become > > part of > > the transaction (if it is not active already). So you get a hard > > failure and appropriate logging if the unit cannot be added to the > > transaction for some reason. > > > > Oh, I said "documented" :) systemd documentation does not even define > what "transaction" is. You really need to know low level implementation > details to use it in this way. > > But thank you, I missed this subtlety. Of course another reason could be > stop behavior. Oh, good point! I really had not been considering the implication on stop behaviour. :) Benjamin > > > Care to show more complete example and explain why Wants does not > > > work in this case? > > > > Wants= would work fine. I think it boils down to whether you find > > the > > extra assertions useful. The Requires= documentation actually > > suggests > > using Wants= exactly to avoid this. > > > > Benjamin > > > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
