Re: [EXT] Re: Re: "OnUnitInactiveSec Timer not firing" issue

["Windl, Ulrich" <u.windl@xxxxxx>]

Hi!

Top-posting this time:
Reading the manual carefully, I recognized an asymmetry:
OnActiveSec= defines a timer relative to the moment the timer itself is activated.
OnUnitInactiveSec= defines a timer relative to when the unit the timer is activating was last deactivated.

Also the manual des not state WHERE that state is remembered.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: systemd-devel <systemd-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On
> Behalf Of Windl, Ulrich
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2024 10:26 AM
> To: Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@xxxxxxxxx>; Mantas Mikulėnas
> <grawity@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [EXT] Re:  Re: "OnUnitInactiveSec Timer not firing"
> issue
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2024 1:19 PM
> > To: Mantas Mikulėnas <grawity@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Windl, Ulrich <u.windl@xxxxxx>; systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [EXT] Re:  "OnUnitInactiveSec Timer not firing"
> issue
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 2:12 PM Mantas Mikulėnas <grawity@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >>
> > >> Furthermore it seems to be necessary to run the service unit itself,  too
> > (assuming it must be enabled also, right?)
> > >
> > >
> > > No. The purpose of the timer is to start the service, so starting the service
> > manually (or "enabling" it, to be started on boot) would be redundant.
> > >
> >
> > OnUnitInactiveSec begins counting when service gets stopped. How is
> > this timer supposed to start a service that was never active (and
> > hence never stopped) before?
> [Windl, Ulrich]
> 
> OK, so what would you suggest instead?
> Alternatively, can you explain where OnUnitInactiveSec would make sense?