[systemd-devel] Using `systemctl edit` on "invalid" unit names

[Ivan Shapovalov]

On Saturday 13 December 2014 at 15:34:01, Ronny Chevalier wrote:	
> 2014-12-13 11:33 GMT+01:00 Ivan Shapovalov <intelfx100 at gmail.com>:
> > Hello all,
> 
> Hi,
> 
> >
> > it seems that the newly added `systemctl edit` command requires its arguments
> > to be valid unit names.
> >
> > This causes `edit` operation to fail in apparently valid use-cases like
> >
> >     systemctl edit getty at .service
> 
> This is fixed in git now, thanks!
> 
> > or
> >     systemctl edit autovt at tty1.service
> >
> > In second case, the error message is especially cryptic:
> > "autovt at tty1.service ignored: not found".
> 
> It worked before and it still works for me.

Do you have "getty at tty1.service" explicity enabled? I do have.

> > Actually I understand what it does mean: systemctl asks the manager to show
> > unit's FragmentPath -> the manager tries to load the unit -> loading fails with
> > "File exists" because getty at tty1.service is already instantiated.
> 
> I don't see why it should fail for this reason ?
> 
> >
> > (BTW, it's a separate question: is this failure valid or is it a bug?)
> >
> 
> systemctl edit getty at .service, should have worked before so yes this was a bug.

Now both `edit getty@` and `edit getty at tty1` work, but I'd expect the latter
to honor the template parameter; i. e. create a drop-in for getty at tty1.service...
Is this possible?

-- 
Ivan Shapovalov / intelfx /
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 213 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/attachments/20141214/eca57bc9/attachment.sig>