[systemd-devel] Using `systemctl edit` on "invalid" unit names
intelfx100 at gmail.com
Sun Dec 14 05:21:32 PST 2014
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,
> > 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...
Size: 213 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the systemd-devel