Summary: | ExecStop should honour RemainAfterExit and KillMode | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | systemd | Reporter: | Tim Desjardins <timd> |
Component: | general | Assignee: | systemd-bugs |
Status: | RESOLVED WORKSFORME | QA Contact: | systemd-bugs |
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | Other | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
i915 platform: | i915 features: |
Description
Tim Desjardins
2013-06-05 04:20:22 UTC
I think they were never intended to be symmetrical. Do you want a unit to be considered "active" after it is "stopped" if RemainAfterExit=yes? This makes no sense. For your situation, use 2 separate services. Closing, due to lack of response. Honestly what comment could I make that would get the systemd maintainers to take this seriously? Admittedly this is a corner case and I imagine most people will just manually stop and start their services, but there was a better way once, no longer. Asymmetry (or un-orthogonality) is a code (design) smell. It's also means that things that could be done before systemd can no longer be performed, which is a loss of functionality. Well, one option would be to use ExecStop=/usr/bin/systemctl --no-block someotherservice.service or so... |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.