On Mo, 24.10.22 12:24, Ulrich Windl (Ulrich.Windl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > >>> Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb am 24.10.2022 um 10:26 in > Nachricht > <CAA91j0W3t5a-1MNPaehRhG3DuBYU0eJLpL3X0jvMvpDFsRb3FQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 9:48 AM Ulrich Windl > > <Ulrich.Windl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> >>> Alex Aminoff <aminoff@xxxxxxxx> schrieb am 21.10.2022 um 18:11 in Nachricht > >> <c6daef42-ee08-0293-e198-8362691a3185@xxxxxxxx>: > >> > >> ... > >> > Just to close out this thread, I am happy to report that > >> > > >> > ExecStart=systemctl start --no-block multi-user.target > >> > > >> > worked great. > >> > >> Makes me wonder: How does systemd handle indirect recursive starts (like the > > one shown)? > >> > > > > What do you call a "recursive start"? "systemctl start" simply tells > > starting multi-user.target via ExecStart=systemctl start starts all depending units, and probably one of those starts the multi-user.target again. > That's what I call recursive. If you enqueue a unit for starting while it is already enqueued for starting this has no effect. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Berlin