-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 17/11/15 17:29, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote: > On 17.11.2015 17:51, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote: >> Nick Bright wrote: >>> On 11/17/2015 8:18 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: >>>> This behaviour is congruent with SELinux. One utility adjusts >>>> the permanent configuration, the one that will be applied at >>>> startup. Another changes the current running environment >>>> without altering the startup config. From a sysadmin point of >>>> view this is desirable since changes to a running system are >>>> often performed for empirical testing. Leaving ephemeral >>>> state changes permanently fixed in the startup config could, >>>> and almost certainly would eventually, lead to serious >>>> problem during a reboot. Likewise, immediately introducing a >>>> state change to a running system when reconfiguring system >>>> startup options is just begging for an operations incident >>>> report. It may not be intuitive to some but it is certainly >>>> the logical way of handling this. >>> >>> I certainly don't disagree with this behavior. >>> >>> What I disagree with is documented commands _*not working and >>> failing silently*_. >>> >> I agree, and it seems to be the way systemd works, as a theme, as >> it were. I restart a service... and it tells me *nothing* at all. >> I have to run a second command, to ask the status. I've no idea >> why it's "bad form" to tell me progress, and final result. You'd >> think they were an old New Englander..... > > Systemd has better mechanisms to report feedback compared to SysV > scripts but if the creators of the service files and the daemons > don't make use of these that's hardly systemd's fault. The best way > is to use "Type=notify" which allows a daemon to actually report to > systemd when it is done initializing. If the daemon doesn't support > this then you can still use ExecStartPost to specify a command that > verifies that the daemon indeed did start up correctly (and no the > binary returning a code of 0 does not mean the service is actually > up-and-running properly). > > Regards, Dennis > You may well be right. However for those of us who just want to get the system running it has lousy reporting. Under SysV setting -vx on the script gave meaningful output - there's no easy equivalent under systemctl. Systemctl returning success status on daemon failure is plain stupid. I'm sure systemd does wonderful things and is the future and we're stuck with it now until at least CentOS/RHEL 8. One of the great joys of *NIX is small, stable text files that can be handled without vast study unlike the obscure behemoth that would look good coming out of Redmond. Even getting ntp to supply time to another system takes hours instead of 5 minutes. If I ever meet Poettering I'll be sure to sup with a long spoon. ;-( -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJWS5ksAAoJEAF3yXsqtyBlA1oQANrvHWI3JbGUfREfZWYUiRxi ZTP3rATIyXwbmgK7ApcanAXqrnF1M1PmSarmnLQFhaNdNI1an5YdT/qM5tpnBUwg MemJSUNZHPAxdg8KDqRr2alb0jLK/GHALO+43XaEQN3CMZfZbz2rU6xKToNtF4GP YK2o+UdPGnpvs8fj8kXkIiLiBn6rc9pBl0MABLnfdqvS13LggrUPFVhcc6oyH2FS IgQk8rmOgFaiiqKb5r3hRpWvVbDpBo+J4CiHa0qI3d3R4OgDgZHFLfwX0CJCjbty Kkoe/qJgNwHXnHwlJ7ZyEgx+ARKTI8Wii8S7sM0ZSAaAnkdf1SltC8DXn0jKCUKo 7Q5eYzNuf86XOfGCjrLG57Hy7v8aQG3NVa4pLFrhKUvEIjNvE14DePX18bp3Y7Yv aKhBdnu/UVkSvoriCLCAtbVnZvKv6Jj6v9ayW6Ke/Uyfphs24m0KCM4rlMQjH9hj IsD6qJVc2yfLQMZ9OL8emusXLRAmRf002oWVtFrBaskdL9GFkG00eMewADyFyM2r HUlkcGdP4EsFaPF74spRjhY4sl+PRQ3Hl3QyQ5xz51N8+bnuua3Dv5gniDDeqMc/ 3pa4IZAReYN6drO7dKBmh2AGqVX7C8JZJDsJ5kb8PN0O4L2SAq/V4rB3lb1w/WoY TH9EcBGRtdmNxsF801Ah =QOQq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
