On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 04:14:24AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Kay Sievers <k...@vrfy.org> wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Colin Guthrie <gm...@colin.guthr.ie> >> > wrote: >> >> >> I only just rejigged things for the last time this flipped around and >> >> now sysctl has decided to buck the trend of the other tools and follow a >> >> "later file has priority"? I think consistency is good here (even if >> >> conceptually, a later file overriding an earlier one "feels" better. >> > >> > Yes, and later-override-earlier is by far the bigger trend. :) >> > >> >> The order was previously "fixed" such that earlier files win for several >> >> tools binfmt, tmpfiles >> >> modules-load >> >> Oh, what a mess. Quite a few man pages described pretty much the >> opposite of what is done, not only in that file this patch fixed. >> >> I now hopefully fixed all of the man pages to describe what the code >> does. Now we have: >> >> binfmt - the last entry wins, people are allowed to overwrite earlier stuff >> tmpfiles - the first entry wins; uniqueness required, everything else an >> error >> sysctl - the last entry wins, people are allowed overwrite earlier stuff >> presets - the first entry wins, the search just stops there >> modules-load - there is no order, it's just a set of names that gets >> applied > Hm, and .service and service.d/*.conf? I think last entry wins also.
Right, that's also assignment-style, allows overwriting, like sysctl or shell variable, and the last one wins. Kay _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel