On Tue, 08.07.14 22:15, brane2 (bran...@s5tehnika.net) wrote:
> Hi to all,
>
> I thought to inform you that I came across a bug within systemctl.
> Some options produce no output, although according to manuals and
> examples it should.
>
> Like for example:
>
> systemctl -t mount
>
> But if I
On Tue, 08.07.14 22:41, brane2 (bran...@s5tehnika.net) wrote:
> >>I thought to inform you that I came across a bug within
> >>systemctl. Some options produce no output, although according to
> >>manuals and examples it should.
> >
> >first to cerrect a typo - I meant latest version 215,not 125 as
Dne 08. 07. 2014 22:34, piše brane2:
Dne 08. 07. 2014 22:15, piše brane2:
Hi to all,
I thought to inform you that I came across a bug within systemctl.
Some options produce no output, although according to manuals and
examples it should.
first to cerrect a typo - I meant latest version 215,
Dne 08. 07. 2014 22:15, piše brane2:
Hi to all,
I thought to inform you that I came across a bug within systemctl.
Some options produce no output, although according to manuals and
examples it should.
first to cerrect a typo - I meant latest version 215,not 125 as in
subject line.
Second,
Hi to all,
I thought to inform you that I came across a bug within systemctl. Some
options produce no output, although according to manuals and examples it
should.
Like for example:
systemctl -t mount
But if I send systemctl's output through pipe, I get output.
So:
systemctl -t mount | ca
