[PATCH] wpa_supplicant: systemd service directives
holgerschurig at gmail.com
Mon Feb 3 03:43:18 EST 2014
> $ man systemd.unit
> No manual entry for systemd.unit
It seems that you don't run systemd, because this man page comes with
systemd. You can find all of it's manpages online as well, see
The one in question is
http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/systemd.unit.html. It says ...
Additional names this unit shall be installed under. The names listed
here must have the same suffix (i.e. type) as the unit file name. This
option may be specified more than once, in which case all listed names
are used. At installation time, systemctl enable will create symlinks
from these names to the unit filename.
A symbolic link is created in the .wants/ or .requires/ directory of
the listed unit when this unit is activated by systemctl enable. This
has the effect that a dependency of type Wants= or Requires= is added
from the listed unit to the current unit. The primary result is that
the current unit will be started when the listed unit is started. See
the description of Wants= and Requires= in the [Unit] section for
WantedBy=foo.service in a service bar.service is mostly equivalent to
Alias=foo.service.wants/bar.service in the same file. In case of
template units, systemctl enable must be called with an instance name,
and this instance will be added to the .wants/ or .requires/ list of
the listed unit. E.g. WantedBy=getty.target in a service
getty at .service will result in systemctl enable getty at tty2.service
creating a getty.target.wants/getty at tty2.service link to
getty at .service.
But with all of this info, I don't see why this comment is necessary.
And I don't know why the patched unit files are "systemd unit
templates" (they use %I inside),but why they aren't named like
template units: they lack the @ in their filename.
More information about the HostAP