Hi Lennart, I've filed https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/7877 for this. Thanks for explain the reason of not document this in the first place.
John Lin 2018-01-13 0:41 GMT+08:00 Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net>: > On Do, 11.01.18 17:52, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote: > > > At boot, both would be started as part of the same transaction (same > > would happen here if you started a third.service that depended on both > > first.service and second.service, then second.service would always > > wait). Here second.service is just started individually, and systemd > > has no idea at that time that first.service is going to be running at > > all. Given that, it really can't behave any differently (it can't delay > > the start of second.service to wait for first.service, when as far as > > it knows first.service may well never get started at all!). It's only > > after second.service is already running that it sees that first.service > > will be started, and at that point it's too late to make second.service > > wait. There really is nothing the init portion could do differently > > given the semantics of bare "After" (the behavior could be changed in > > the systemctl binary). > > Yupp, this is exactly what happens. > > That said, we should probably make the > multiple-operations-in-a-single-transaction thing happen. > > Lennart > > -- > Lennart Poettering, Red Hat > _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel >
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
