On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 00:02:21 +0200 Borislav Petkov <[email protected]> wrote:
> > If you silently fail here, then we lose all logging because systemd > > thinks this is working when it is not. That's not what I want. > > Hmm, ok, you're making sense to me. > > Do you want an error message too or only an -ENODEV returned or > somesuch? > My patch returned -EPERM and it works on my box. That is, systemd finds something else to log to. -- Steve
