On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 02:23:02 +, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote:
> It didn't start because the service unit was wrong.
>
> A quick check of the log revealed that the service was trying to create
> a local-domain socket at |/run/lirc/lircd| . But there was no
> |/run/lirc/| directory on my sys
On 17/01/16 11:36, Alec Leamas wrote:
> On 17/01/16 03:23, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote:
>> A quick check of the log revealed that the service was trying to create
>> a local-domain socket at |/run/lirc/lircd| . But there was no
>> |/run/lirc/| directory on my system to contain that. Your syste
Jonathan de Boyne Pollard:
It didn't start because the service unit was wrong.
A quick check of the log revealed that the service was trying to
create a local-domain socket at |/run/lirc/lircd| . But there was no
|/run/lirc/| directory on my system to contain that. Your systemd
units didn'
On 17/01/16 03:23, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote:
> Michael Biebl:
>
>> I wonder if nosh could be an option for non-linux. According to its
>> website it supports native systemd service files. I have to admit
>> though, I never looked at nosh myself, so I have no idea how far that
>> "systemd su
Hi!
Thansk for long reply!
On 17/01/16 03:23, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote:
Michael Biebl:
I wonder if nosh could be an option for non-linux. According to its
website it supports native systemd service files.
This caught my eye, so I thought that I'd demonstrate. Before getting
to what
Michael Biebl:
I wonder if nosh could be an option for non-linux. According to its
website it supports native systemd service files. I have to admit
though, I never looked at nosh myself, so I have no idea how far that
"systemd support" goes.
This caught my eye, so I thought that I'd demonst
On 15/01/16 21:58, Stefan Lippers-Hollmann wrote:
Hi
On 2016-01-15, Alec Leamas wrote:
On 15/01/16 21:06, Michael Biebl wrote:
Am 15.01.2016 um 21:01 schrieb Alec Leamas:
On 15/01/16 19:04, Russ Allbery wrote:
[...]
If the names do not match, you can ship a (static) symlink in the
package,
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:07:11AM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> It's not only about downstreams. What about e.g. Debian-kFreeBSD, or
> Debian-Hurd?
Debian/kFreeBSD is a supported architecture, but Debian-Hurd is currently
unofficial.
Le vendredi 15 janvier 2016, 21:58:18 Anthony DeRobertis a écrit :
> On 01/15/2016 09:29 PM, Jens Reyer wrote:
> > Does this also work somehow for e.g. foo-daily.service +
> > foo-daily.timer being favored over /etc/cron.daily/foo? Next to a
> > foo.service being favored over /etc/init.d/foo. Tha
On 01/15/2016 09:29 PM, Jens Reyer wrote:
Does this also work somehow for e.g. foo-daily.service +
foo-daily.timer being favored over /etc/cron.daily/foo? Next to a
foo.service being favored over /etc/init.d/foo. Thanks and greets jre
No, it won't work automatically. Cron doesn't look at syst
On 01/15/2016 09:06 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> If your package ships both a systemd service unit and a sysv init
> script, you need to make sure that under systemd the native service file
> is used.
> The easiest way to achieve that is to use the same names for the unit
> file and the init script,
+++ Russ Allbery [2016-01-15 10:04 -0800]:
> Alec Leamas writes:
>
> > Given all this: would it be OK to drop the sysV files in a stretch
> > update?
Please don't. Some people still use sysVinit and expect things to work
more-or-less as they did previously.
> I feel like removing the sysvinit
Am 15.01.2016 um 21:56 schrieb Michael Biebl:
> An example for that is alsa-utils:
> The sysv init script is named
>
> /etc/init.d/alsa-utils
>
> The systemd service units:
> /lib/systemd/system/alsa-store.service
> /lib/systemd/system/alsa-state.service
> /lib/systemd/system/alsa-restore.service
Hi
On 2016-01-15, Alec Leamas wrote:
> On 15/01/16 21:06, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > Am 15.01.2016 um 21:01 schrieb Alec Leamas:
> >> On 15/01/16 19:04, Russ Allbery wrote:
[...]
> > If the names do not match, you can ship a (static) symlink in the
> > package, say you have
> > /etc/init.d/foo a
Am 15.01.2016 um 21:48 schrieb Michael Biebl:
> Hi Alec
>
> Am 15.01.2016 um 21:42 schrieb Alec Leamas:
>> It's more complicated. The systemd setup is three different services,
>> the sysV one. There is no systemd service directly corresponding to
>> the sysV one. In other words, here is two th
Hi Alec
Am 15.01.2016 um 21:42 schrieb Alec Leamas:
> It's more complicated. The systemd setup is three different services,
> the sysV one. There is no systemd service directly corresponding to
> the sysV one. In other words, here is two things taking place at once:
> a major upgrade + sysV ->
Hi
On 2016-01-15, Alec Leamas wrote:
> On 15/01/16 19:04, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >
> > I feel like removing the sysvinit scripts entirely would be "reverting
> > existing support without a compelling reason." But I also think that
> > people who want to use sysvinit (or upstart, or any other init
On 15/01/16 21:06, Michael Biebl wrote:
Am 15.01.2016 um 21:01 schrieb Alec Leamas:
On 15/01/16 19:04, Russ Allbery wrote:
I feel like removing the sysvinit scripts entirely would be "reverting
existing support without a compelling reason." But I also think that
people who want to use sysvini
Am 15.01.2016 um 21:01 schrieb Alec Leamas:
> On 15/01/16 19:04, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>
>> I feel like removing the sysvinit scripts entirely would be "reverting
>> existing support without a compelling reason." But I also think that
>> people who want to use sysvinit (or upstart, or any other ini
On 15/01/16 19:04, Russ Allbery wrote:
I feel like removing the sysvinit scripts entirely would be "reverting
existing support without a compelling reason." But I also think that
people who want to use sysvinit (or upstart, or any other init system)
will have to contribute some support there in
Am 15.01.2016 um 16:07 schrieb The Wanderer:
> It's not only about downstreams. What about e.g. Debian-kFreeBSD, or
> Debian-Hurd? Both are theoretically official Debian, as far as I
> understand matters, rather than being downstream distros - but neither
> one is supported by systemd.
I wonder if
Alec Leamas writes:
> In the process of a complicated update, there is a question about how to
> handle the systemV init scripts when doing the systemd transition.
> The package (lirc) has upstream systemd scripts which of course are
> packaged. The existing Debian version has sysV scripts. Howe
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 03:45:30PM +0100, Alec Leamas wrote:
> Support for users not using systemd. I understand that such users will be
> unhappy without the scripts - but am I obliged under current policy
> decisions to maintain this configuration?
Up until the next stable release at least, you
On 2016-01-15 at 09:45, Alec Leamas wrote:
> On 15/01/16 14:13, Dmitrii Kashin wrote:
>
>> Alec Leamas writes:
>>
>>> Dear list,
>>> Given all this: would it be OK to drop the sysV files in a
>>> stretch update?
>>
>> I suppose it's not okay, because you'll get a lot of bug reports
>> from no
On 15/01/16 14:13, Dmitrii Kashin wrote:
Alec Leamas writes:
Dear list,
Given all this: would it be OK to drop the sysV files in a stretch update?
I suppose it's not okay, because you'll get a lot of bug reports from
non-linux based debian distributions. And if it's not your business, an
Alec Leamas writes:
> Dear list,
>
> In the process of a complicated update, there is a question about how
> to handle the systemV init scripts when doing the systemd transition.
>
> The package (lirc) has upstream systemd scripts which of course are
> packaged. The existing Debian version has sy
Dear list,
In the process of a complicated update, there is a question about how to
handle the systemV init scripts when doing the systemd transition.
The package (lirc) has upstream systemd scripts which of course are
packaged. The existing Debian version has sysV scripts. However, these
ar
27 matches
Mail list logo
