[Freeipa-devel] Should mask/unmask be part of disabling/enabling services in systemd?

[Jan Cholasta]

Dne 19.9.2014 v 17:23 Rob Crittenden napsal(a):
> Martin Basti wrote:
>> Hello list,
>>
>> I need to use systemd mask/unmask in ipa service.
>>
>> But as Honza wrote:
>> "IMO masking/unmasking should be part of disabling/enabling a service in
>> systemd. AFAIK in most other init systems when you disable a service, it
>> has the same effect as masking the service in systemd - it will never be
>> started until it is enabled/unmasked again. "
>>
>> So my questions is, should be masking part of disabling service in
>> systemd, to be platform independent?
>> Or should we add mask/unmask methods to
>> ipaplatform.base.services.PlatformService where mask is alias for disable?
>>
>> Martin^2
>>
>
> After reading http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/three-levels-of-off I
> disagree that disabling in SysV is the same as masking in systemd,
> though I guess it depends on the meaning of disable. According to that
> page chkconfig off <service> is equivalent to systemctl disable
> <service>.service, which is what we do now AFAIR.

I don't think that's entirely correct. They are equivalent mechanically 
(a symlink is added/removed when a service is enabled/disabled), but 
effectively they are different. AFAIK in SysV, services can be started 
either manually or automatically on boot and if you disable a service 
the only way it will start is when you do it manually. In systemd, there 
are more ways services can be started automatically (socket, D-Bus, 
etc.) and disabling a service will only disable automatic start *on 
boot*, but it can still be started automatically, which contrasts with 
what SysV does.

>
> Why do you need to mask a service, e.g. render it completely unstartable?
>
> rob
>


-- 
Jan Cholasta