Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Control: tag -1 pending Hello Raphael, Raphael Hertzog [2016-03-08 11:12 +0100]: > Ok. So here's the final patch that I'm now using in Kali. It seems to work > from the quick tests that I did. Thank you! This looks good to me, thanks to Andreas and you for working on this! I also applied your

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Hi Martin, On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Martin Pitt wrote: > Many thanks for working on this! > > However, this breaks the test suite left and right: > > http://paste.ubuntu.com/15378313/ > > on a lot of "No such file or directory" or "unable to read > footest.service" errors? Duh, I missed the

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Hello Raphael, Raphael Hertzog [2016-03-08 11:12 +0100]: > Ok. So here's the final patch that I'm now using in Kali. It seems to work > from the quick tests that I did. Many thanks for working on this! However, this breaks the test suite left and right: http://paste.ubuntu.com/15378313/ on

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Hi, On Fri, 04 Mar 2016, Felipe Sateler wrote: > This is only needed when creating links manually. As noted above, when > invoking via systemctl it does the reload automatically. Ok. So here's the final patch that I'm now using in Kali. It seems to work from the quick tests that I did. And I

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Hello Andreas, thanks for working on this patch! I want to test your patch in Kali and make it ready for inclusion. But there are things that I don't really understand... On Wed, 02 Mar 2016, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > Please note that perl warns about the smartmatch being experimental. >

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Hello again, On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 04:30:53PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 04 Mar 2016, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > > > So I have read about what smartmatch does... but basically I think it > > > does not do what you wanted to do. So can you tell me what you wanted > > > to

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

On 4 March 2016 at 12:12, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > Hello Raphael, > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 03:36:54PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >> Hello Andreas, >> >> thanks for working on this patch! >> >> I want to test your patch in Kali and make it ready for inclusion. But >>

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Hi, On Fri, 04 Mar 2016, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > > So I have read about what smartmatch does... but basically I think it > > does not do what you wanted to do. So can you tell me what you wanted > > to test? > > The end result is only used for "changed something" (or not). > > See:

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Hello Raphael, On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 03:36:54PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hello Andreas, > > thanks for working on this patch! > > I want to test your patch in Kali and make it ready for inclusion. But > there are things that I don't really understand... > > On Wed, 02 Mar 2016,

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Control: tags -1 + patch Hello again. On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 05:42:19PM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > Hello! > > I'm attaching a completely untested attempt at prefering "systemctl > preset" over just enabling unconditionally. [...] Ok, I actually tested it now and except for a minor

Bug#772555: untested hacky attempt at using systemctl preset

Hello! I'm attaching a completely untested attempt at prefering "systemctl preset" over just enabling unconditionally. I've checked and it seems on a system running sysvinit-core and systemd package installed (eg. systemctl available) "systemctl preset ..." seems to do the right thing (as well