On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 21:21 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 24.08.11 21:12, Marius Tolzmann ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> >
> > On 24.08.2011 18:52, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > >Hmm, yeah, if ExecStartPre= we put the unit in failure mode.
> > >
> > >So, let me see if I got thi
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 18:55:43 +0200
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 24.08.11 21:40, Mike Kazantsev ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> > > > Reexec reacts on these units right before "Deserializing state..." msg,
> > > > with the same messages.
> > > > I'll check whether they go away on reexec
On Thu, 25.08.11 00:48, Miklos Vajna ([email protected]) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just like timedated, I think localed can go on embedded systems.
Thanks!
Applied.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
___
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-de
Hi,
Just like timedated, I think localed can go on embedded systems.
Thanks.
From ab1358c122783eb2bb592c514ea0853c5395d0e0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Miklos Vajna
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 00:45:26 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] build-sys: Add --disable-localed configure switch
---
Makefile.am | 5
On Wed, 24.08.11 23:54, Marius Tolzmann ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> On 24.08.2011 21:21, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >On Wed, 24.08.11 21:12, Marius Tolzmann ([email protected]) wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>On 24.08.2011 18:52, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >>>Hmm, yeah, if ExecStartPre= we put
On 24.08.2011 21:21, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 24.08.11 21:12, Marius Tolzmann ([email protected]) wrote:
On 24.08.2011 18:52, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Hmm, yeah, if ExecStartPre= we put the unit in failure mode.
So, let me see if I got this right: you are looking for something
On 08/24/2011 08:04 PM, Albert Strasheim wrote:
Also, Jóhann Guðmundsso said here that foo=bar isn't parsed correctly:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2011-August/003155.html
Was he right about that?
Nope I was wrong about that statement but it might be a bug as Lennart
m
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 08:39:38PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Sat, 06.08.11 15:48, Josh Triplett ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> > Many people prefer to avoid clearing /tmp and /var/tmp, and
> > distributions often have explicit settings for how often to clear them
> > if at all. Ov
Hello
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Tue, 16.08.11 19:53, Albert Strasheim ([email protected]) wrote:
>> Hello again
>> My previous example confused the issue by mentioning
>> fedora-autorelabal.service.
>> With the following in /etc/systemd/system/foobar.service
On Wed, 24.08.11 21:12, Marius Tolzmann ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> On 24.08.2011 18:52, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >Hmm, yeah, if ExecStartPre= we put the unit in failure mode.
> >
> >So, let me see if I got this right: you are looking for something like
> >ExecStartPre= but twhere the
On Tue, 16.08.11 19:53, Albert Strasheim ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> Hello again
>
> My previous example confused the issue by mentioning
> fedora-autorelabal.service.
>
> With the following in /etc/systemd/system/foobar.service:
So, I tried to reproduce your issue with ConditionKernelComm
On 24.08.2011 18:52, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Hmm, yeah, if ExecStartPre= we put the unit in failure mode.
So, let me see if I got this right: you are looking for something like
ExecStartPre= but twhere the program when it returns non-zero should
just cause the service to be skipped but not be
On Fri, 19.08.11 17:22, Frederic Crozat ([email protected]) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> even if I know it is kind of SUSE specific, I was wondering if you were
> interested in merging attached patch (I tried to wrapped most of it
> inside TARGET_SUSE) which support more options from SUSE kbd
> initscripts.
>
On Sat, 06.08.11 15:48, Josh Triplett ([email protected]) wrote:
> Many people prefer to avoid clearing /tmp and /var/tmp, and
> distributions often have explicit settings for how often to clear them
> if at all. Overriding those with systemd currently requires overriding
> all of /usr/lib/tm
On Wed, 24.08.11 13:39, Bill Nottingham ([email protected]) wrote:
> > r /upgrade
> >
> > That way we can be sure that the flag file is removed as soon as the
> > root fs is writable.
> >
> > The rest of the earlier suggestion would stay the same.
>
> So, thinking about the UI of this, I'm ass
Lennart Poettering ([email protected]) said:
> > very very early at boot /var might not be around yet. So maybe the
> > upgrade packs should be placed somewhere in the rootfs (or in /boot?
> > that might be a good idea actually if it fits...). Split-off /var is
> > nothing we can get rid of,
On Thu, 25.08.11 02:43, Jeremy ([email protected]) wrote:
> ControlGroupPersistant=yes for persistent runtime only statistics
> ControlGroupPersistent=/ for persistent disk-backed
> statistics?
I don't think systemd should be involved in syncing to disk the data the
kernel generates for cgrou
On Wed, 24.08.11 21:40, Mike Kazantsev ([email protected]) wrote:
> > > Reexec reacts on these units right before "Deserializing state..." msg,
> > > with the same messages.
> > > I'll check whether they go away on reexec to 32 and reappear in 33, and
> > > if that's the case, will have results
On Wed, 24.08.11 18:25, Marius Tolzmann ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> On 24.08.2011 16:01, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >On Tue, 02.08.11 17:06, Marius Tolzmann ([email protected]) wrote:
> >>
> >>is there a way to execute a program and take its exit status to
> >>evaluate the condition
On 24.08.2011 16:01, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 02.08.11 17:06, Marius Tolzmann ([email protected]) wrote:
is there a way to execute a program and take its exit status to
evaluate the condition? like ConditionExec or whatever.
is this already possible without getting a "failed" ser
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 18:11:40 +0200
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Sat, 20.08.11 15:21, Mike Kazantsev ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:20:20 +0200
> > Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 09.08.11 07:02, Mike Kazantsev ([email protected]) wrote:
> > >
> > >
On 08/24/2011 04:19 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
A open question is how I get the whole thing persistent. So not each
time when an application starts the counters begin at 0. My guts feeling
systemd should take of this but I don't know if that is the right
direction.
Hmm, you could simpl
Hi Lennart,
On 08/24/2011 03:42 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 02.08.11 15:51, Daniel Wagner ([email protected]) wrote:
So my thinking is, instead of using the uid driver trick, I could use
cgroups for collecting the network traffic. At least from the sub module
description it seems to be
Hi Lennart
Yep, I didn't read the last sentence in the documentation about this parameter.
(embarrassing)
Seems to work fine now, start script writes this file and systemd successfully
reports the tomcat as running.
Thanks a lot
Cheers
josh
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Lennart Poett
On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 11:19 -0300, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 02.08.11 15:51, Daniel Wagner ([email protected]) wrote:
> >
> >> So my thinking is, instead of using the uid driver trick, I could
use
> >> cgroups for collect
On Thu, 04.08.11 17:59, Frederic Crozat ([email protected]) wrote:
> Since openSUSE doesn't use plymouth, there is no way to ensure
> xdm/gdm/kdm or getty isn't started while passphrase query is being asked
> on tty1.
>
> Attached patch ensures local-fs.target is only reached when passphrase
> was
On Thu, 04.08.11 17:57, Frederic Crozat ([email protected]) wrote:
> SUSE is adding "none" as a option to /etc/crypttab when nothing is
> relevant to be put there.
>
> Attached patch ensures systemd doesn't complain about it (since it works
> fine).
Thanks, applied!
Lennart
--
Lennart Poetteri
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Tue, 02.08.11 15:51, Daniel Wagner ([email protected]) wrote:
>
>> So my thinking is, instead of using the uid driver trick, I could use
>> cgroups for collecting the network traffic. At least from the sub module
>> description it seems
On Wed, 03.08.11 07:46, Josh Geisser ([email protected]) wrote:
> Hi there
>
> We developt an own rc script a while ago for maintaining our tomcats. (mainly
> improved shutdown behaviour with eventual kill).
> The script takes start/Stopp/status as arguments, and identifies the right
> PID by
On Wed, 03.08.11 00:05, Miklos Vajna ([email protected]) wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] build-sys: Add --disable-timedated configure switch
Thanks a lot! Applied.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
___
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-de
On Tue, 02.08.11 17:06, Marius Tolzmann ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> hi..
>
> since conditions specifying wheter a service should start are
> somehow limited to the existence of some files/directories/etc. i
> was searching for something more complex to handle conditional
> service starts
2011/8/24 Lennart Poettering :
> On Wed, 24.08.11 14:38, Stef Bon ([email protected]) wrote:
>
>>
>> Please let me explain why I think this is strange to me:
>>
>> in line 713 there is a call to clone, so here the cloned child process
>> has it's own namespace.
>>
>> in line 759 all the submount li
On Tue, 02.08.11 15:51, Daniel Wagner ([email protected]) wrote:
> So my thinking is, instead of using the uid driver trick, I could use
> cgroups for collecting the network traffic. At least from the sub module
> description it seems to be the right spot to add a new statistic
> interface.
Yupp, th
On Wed, 24.08.11 14:38, Stef Bon ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> Please let me explain why I think this is strange to me:
>
> in line 713 there is a call to clone, so here the cloned child process
> has it's own namespace.
>
> in line 759 all the submount like proc, dev and sys are done on the
>
Please let me explain why I think this is strange to me:
in line 713 there is a call to clone, so here the cloned child process
has it's own namespace.
in line 759 all the submount like proc, dev and sys are done on the
directory to change to.
in line 775 the mount is done were talking about, us
Le mercredi 24 août 2011 à 14:12 +0200, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> On Wed, 24.08.11 13:42, Frederic Crozat ([email protected]) wrote:
> > It didn't work as expected due to a bug in
> > path-lookup.c:lookup_paths_init which remove from the lookup path lists
> > empty directories : therefore /run
Hello
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 24.08.11 13:26, Albert Strasheim ([email protected]) wrote:
>> When reloading the module, there is no transaction in the debug log.
>> When I strace systemd, I can see that epoll returns and that systemd
>> calls recvmsg t
On Wed, 24.08.11 13:42, Frederic Crozat ([email protected]) wrote:
> > Hmm, I am a bit confused. A reload of systemd will cause the generators
> > to be run, so yupp, they should be applied in that case.
> >
> > Maybe your generator does not work properly during the early boot phase
> > since it r
On Wed, 24.08.11 13:26, Albert Strasheim ([email protected]) wrote:
> When reloading the module, there is no transaction in the debug log.
>
> When I strace systemd, I can see that epoll returns and that systemd
> calls recvmsg twice for the netlink messages about the two network
> ports. systemd
On Wed, 24.08.11 11:41, Stef Bon ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> I see, but why the MS_MOVE?
In the namespace we are not interested anymore in the original mount. We
want to move it to our root dir.
> As I already tried to explain, a move is a little bit strange, you do
> not want to move the ro
Le mercredi 24 août 2011 à 13:42 +0200, Frederic Crozat a écrit :
> Le mardi 23 août 2011 à 17:56 +0200, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> > On Mon, 22.08.11 17:52, Frederic Crozat ([email protected]) wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm testing a systemd-generator to create default.target symlink,
>
On 08/24/2011 08:32 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote:
Hmm, with the initramfs moving in the direction of being able to mount /usr, we
could extend it to mount the rest as well. We can see the initramfs as_the_
rescue environment, which could do the upgrade as well, without the need of
doing a reboot afterw
Le mardi 23 août 2011 à 17:56 +0200, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> On Mon, 22.08.11 17:52, Frederic Crozat ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm testing a systemd-generator to create default.target symlink,
> > depending on /etc/inittab content.
> >
> > Generator is working fine, crea
Hello
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Sun, 21.08.11 14:01, Albert Strasheim ([email protected]) wrote:
>> Is there a way to always get this behavior? I'd like my network
>> interfaces to be brought up regardless of how and when their modules
>> are loaded.
> Hmm, c
I see, but why the MS_MOVE?
As I already tried to explain, a move is a little bit strange, you do
not want to move the root.
Does the combination MS_BIND | MS_MOVE first do a bind, and moves that
bind to the desired location?? If this is the case, it makes more
sense.
Stef
2011/8/23 Lennart Po
Hello
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:41 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Thu, 18.08.11 22:03, Albert Strasheim ([email protected]) wrote:
>> Hello all
>> I am trying to use systemd-26 to configure a network device.
>> I've decided to try this instead of the standard Fedora init scripts
>> because I
On 24.08.2011 10:08, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 08/24/2011 01:55 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> So, we want to make clear that any kind of solution that does not use a
>> proper recovery partition is merely a stop gap in our eyes.
>
> Agreed the way forward is recovery partition which g
On 08/24/2011 01:55 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
So, we want to make clear that any kind of solution that does not use a
proper recovery partition is merely a stop gap in our eyes.
Agreed the way forward is recovery partition which get's created at
install time and should be an opt out option
48 matches
Mail list logo
