On 07/07/2014 04:47 PM, lee wrote:
Glenn Holmershadowm@lyonlabs.org writes:
On 07/07/2014 04:34 AM, lee wrote:
The authors of systemd don't even understand what "disabled" means.
A pretty bold statement. Disabled means the same thing it does in sysvinit: the service won't start at boot time.
But it might start any time later because it's not disabled when you disable it.
In systemd, a service that's disabled won't be directly started at boot, but another service can still start it either at boot or later. To keep a service from being started by systemd under any circumstances, you need to mask it. I think that the idea is to make a distinction between services that are only started when something needs them and services that aren't started at all.