[systemd-devel] Unexpected behaviour not noticed by systemctl command
Reindl Harald
h.reindl at thelounge.net
Mon Oct 7 10:48:10 UTC 2019
Am 07.10.19 um 12:43 schrieb Andy Pieters:
> Just lately ran into a fumble. I was trying to stop and disable a
> service and I typed in:
>
> systemctl stop --now example.service
but nowehere "disable" is statet with that command
> The service duly stopped but wasn't disabled because the --now switch
> is only applicable on the disable/enable/mask commands
yes, it "executes the state" instead just disable it for the next boot
but "stop now" don't imply a different behavior as "stop" unless there
would be some timing to exectue "stop" by default which isn't
> However, shouldn't it be good practice to produce a warning or an
> error when a switch is used that has no effect?
it is used, it is stopped *now*
More information about the systemd-devel
mailing list