Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] maintenance: simplify systemctl calls

From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
To: Max Gautier <mg@max.gautier.name>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Lénaïc Huard" <lenaic@lhuard.fr>,
	"Derrick Stolee" <stolee@gmail.com>,
	"Patrick Steinhardt" <ps@pks.im>,
	"Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>, "Jeff King" <peff@peff.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] maintenance: simplify systemctl calls
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 19:09:18 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPig+cTeXMw8pTS9on_CSJraPDYKSLaFd82LEtWjFgOBzH4=yg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240322221327.12204-4-mg@max.gautier.name>

On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 6:13 PM Max Gautier <mg@max.gautier.name> wrote:
> The systemctl invocation to enable or disable the git maintenance timers
> is needlessly complicated:
> - systemctl does not mind at all enabling already enabled units, nor
>   disabling already disabled units.

Has systemctl behavior changed...

> Use only one systemctl invocation per `git maintenance start/stop`.
> Transparently pass its status and output.
> Add the --force option to override conflicting symlinks to previous
> instances of our units files which lived in $XDG_CONFIG_HOME.
>
> Signed-off-by: Max Gautier <mg@max.gautier.name>
> ---
> diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c
> @@ -2303,70 +2303,35 @@ static int is_systemd_timer_available(void)
> -        * Disabling the systemd unit while it is already disabled makes
> -        * systemctl print an error.
> -        * Let's ignore it since it means we already are in the expected state:
> -        * the unit is disabled.

... since this and...

> -                * Disabling an already disabled systemd unit makes
> -                * systemctl fail.
> -                * Let's ignore this failure.

... this were written?

If so, do we still need to worry about older systems in which
systemctl prints errors and/or fails outright?