The subject line had an unfortunate typo the last time I sent this. Let's try again with a fixed subject and see if anyone can tell me what the heck this means :-).
Running dnf install to pick up loads of things for my new f24 partition, this nonsense appeared:
Installing : postfix-2:3.1.0-1.fc24.x86_64 1088/3005 The unit files have no [Install] section. They are not meant to be enabled using systemctl. Possible reasons for having this kind of units are: 1) A unit may be statically enabled by being symlinked from another unit's .wants/ or .requires/ directory. 2) A unit's purpose may be to act as a helper for some other unit which has a requirement dependency on it. 3) A unit may be started when needed via activation (socket, path, timer, D-Bus, udev, scripted systemctl call, ...). Installing : qmobipocket-16.04.1-1.fc24.x86_64 1089/3005
Is this trying to tell me I can't run postfix as a service?
If so, why not?
If not, why did it want to print this gibberish and confuse me?
On Jun 25, 2016 7:42 PM, "Tom Horsley" horsley1953@gmail.com wrote:
The subject line had an unfortunate typo the last time I sent this. Let's try again with a fixed subject and see if anyone can tell me what the heck this means :-).
Running dnf install to pick up loads of things for my new f24 partition, this nonsense appeared:
Installing : postfix-2:3.1.0-1.fc24.x86_64
1088/3005
The unit files have no [Install] section. They are not meant to be enabled using systemctl. Possible reasons for having this kind of units are:
- A unit may be statically enabled by being symlinked from another unit's .wants/ or .requires/ directory.
- A unit's purpose may be to act as a helper for some other unit which
has
a requirement dependency on it. 3) A unit may be started when needed via activation (socket, path, timer, D-Bus, udev, scripted systemctl call, ...). Installing : qmobipocket-16.04.1-1.fc24.x86_64
1089/3005
Is this trying to tell me I can't run postfix as a service?
I don't think so.
If so, why not?
Because I just installed it and used the normal systemctl command to enable and start the service and it started just fine.
If not, why did it want to print this gibberish and confuse me?
It has a strange sense of humor?
On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 20:39:06 +0800 Ed Greshko wrote:
If not, why did it want to print this gibberish and confuse me?
It has a strange sense of humor?
That may be it :-). It sure seems like something thing might possibly belong in rpmlint where the packager might see it, but spewing meaningless and confusing gibberish at everyone installing it seems silly.
-
Ed Greshko -
Tom Horsley