Your message dated Fri, 17 Jun 2016 21:07:08 +0300
with message-id <20160617180708.ga23...@piware.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#734007: document implicit After= of service on socket
has caused the Debian Bug report #734007,
regarding document implicit After= of service on socket
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
734007: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734007
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: systemd
Version: 204-6
Severity: minor
As part of the discussion in the tech-ctte bug report, there seemed to
be general agreement (I haven't checked the source code) that systemd
automatically adds an implicit After= to a service unit on a socket
unit with the same name. I don't think this is currently documented
in systemd.service(5).
There should probably also be a note under Sockets= saying whether
this implicit After= also applies to any units listed in Sockets=.
It may also be good to note in daemon(7) under Socket-Based Activation
(maybe, or maybe under Writing Systemd Unit Files) that service units
written to support socket activation should consider a Requires= on
the socket unit. Without this, it's possible to get inconsistent
behavior if the service is not configured to start at boot and then
it's started manually, or if the admin disables the socket. This may
be intentional flexibility in some cases, where the service unit is
explicitly written to support either service activation or binding its
own sockets, but I at least found the behavior without Requires= to be
surprising and unexpected.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 228-1
Felipe Sateler [2015-06-30 0:44 -0300]:
> Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/418
> > There should probably also be a note under Sockets= saying whether
> > this implicit After= also applies to any units listed in Sockets=.
>
> This is indeed not documented. Filed an upstream bug.
AFAICS this was documented in
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/c129bd5d
and thus in 228-1.
Martin
--
Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org)
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Pkg-systemd-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-systemd-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-systemd-maintainers
