PS:
> and the command fails. What I find curious is that the commit introduces
> a message stating that the match section should be added using "Name=*"
> (which I verified would also work for me) but instead adds a
> "OriginalName=*" match.
Okay, just realized that this is not actually true, I c
Hi all,
I have a question about
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/84ea567eb4326eb970a33188649fde6bea2a0d4e
I am running systemd 242 (242.32-2-arch) which seems to inlude these
changes.
Basically, I suspect that, related to that change, running
`udevadm test-builtin net_setup_link` fails
Thank you for that thorough explanation, much appreciated!
Cheers,
Conrad
On 6/25/19 11:14 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mo, 24.06.19 16:41, Conrad Hoffmann (c...@bitfehler.net) wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> TL;DR: I was wondering what happens if a unit executed early du
On 6/24/19 7:53 PM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> 24.06.2019 17:41, Conrad Hoffmann пишет:
>> Hi,
>>
>> TL;DR: I was wondering what happens if a unit executed early during the
>> boot process changes the current dependency graph by either enabling or
>> even starting
Hi,
TL;DR: I was wondering what happens if a unit executed early during the
boot process changes the current dependency graph by either enabling or
even starting another unit that was previously disabled. Is this defined
behaviour, and if so what are the rules?
Longer version:
I am looking at an
