Re: Can I provide separate enabling for dbus-activation and "normal" start ?

[Max Gautier <mg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 07:43:50PM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> On 22.02.2024 19:09, Max Gautier wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Is it possible when writing a dbus-activable service to provide two
> > separate and independent ways to enable it ?
> > 
> > The D-Bus service file would for instance be:
> > [D-BUS Service]
> > Name=org.freedesktop.Notifications
> > Exec=notification-daemon
> > SystemdService=dbus-org.freedesktop.Notifications.service
> > 
> > The systemd service:
> > [Unit]
> > PartOf=graphical-session.target
> > After=graphical-session.target
> > 
> > [Service]
> > Type=dbus
> > BusName=org.freedesktop.Notifications
> > ExecStart=notification-daemon
> > 
> > [Install]
> > Alias=dbus-org.freedesktop.Notifications.service
> > WantedBy=graphical-session.target
> > 
> > 
> > With that systemd service file, `systemctl enable` would cause the
> > service to be started by graphical-session.target and by
> > dbus-activation; but it is possible to have two separate enable
> > commands, one which would enable the dbus activation, one the
> > graphical-session start ?
> > 
> 
> You do not need any commands, just create corresponding links manually.

I know that I can do that, but I'm trying to write a unit file which
would avoid the need for users to do that. If there is no way, I'll just
choose one and document the others "manual" enabling method, but if I
can provide both, that'd be best.

> 
> > I suppose I should have two separate unit files but I'm not completely
> > sure how to do that without copying the whole file (i.e, is there some
> > Install/Unit relation I can use for that ?)
> > 
> > Thanks !
> > 
> 

-- 
Max Gautier