[systemd-devel] RefuseEnable

Michael D. Berger m.d.berger at ieee.org
Mon Nov 28 10:14:27 PST 2011

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Nottingham [mailto:notting at redhat.com] 
> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 12:14
> To: Michael D. Berger
> Cc: systemd-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] RefuseEnable
> Michael D. Berger (m.d.berger at ieee.org) said: 
> > Is there a way to prevent a service from being enabled?
> 1) Don't have an '[Install]' section in the unit file
> 2) Mask the service (ln -s /dev/null 
> /etc/systemd/system/<foo>.service)
> 3) Don't install the service file/service binary at all
> 4) ExecStartPre=/bin/false
> 5) ... OK, this is rapidly becoming silly
> What exactly are you trying to accomplish? Are you intending 
> the enable-prevention to be done at the package level or the 
> administrator level?
> Bill
> __________ NOD32 6666 (20111128) Information __________
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com
If I understand correctly, "systemctl enable myDaemon", sets
up a soft link which results in myDaemon starting
automatically on boot.  I want to block "systemctl enable
myDaemon".  Blocking "disable" is less important, especially
if "enable" is blocked.  I applied suggestion 1) above, and got
the result I wanted.

The reason for this is that several daemons do not start
correctly on boot on my F16_64.  These include httpd and ntpd. 
Previous posts on the httpd problem yielded no results.  The
ntpd problem is newly discovered.  For a long time, I have had
a daemon I wrote that periodically monitors a list of things
with ps, and starts them if they are not running.  I now use
that for daemons I would like automatically started but do
not start correctly on boot.  I think it best if these problem
daemons do not try to start on boot.  My new system appears to
be functioning well now.

Michael D. Berger
m.d.berger at ieee.org

More information about the systemd-devel mailing list