On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> Hi Elena,
>
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 08.05.13 11:16, Reshetova, Elena ([email protected]) wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This is the patch for review for enabling smack labelling for device
Hi Elena,
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 08.05.13 11:16, Reshetova, Elena ([email protected]) wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is the patch for review for enabling smack labelling for device nodes.
>>
>> The functionality and reasoning is inside. I will be h
On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 19:43 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> b/ let udevadm hwdb --update check, if /var or /var/cache is on a
> separate partition.
If it was just udevadm, that wouldn't be so hard, but replicating
the (what I expect to be fairly fragile) code to detect /var's
paritioning scheme acr
On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 14:49 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> We haven't hashed out all the details yet, but expect this to land very
> soon in git.
Looks like nothing is installing system.slice?
___
systemd-devel mailing list
[email protected]
2013/6/17 Lennart Poettering :
> I am pretty sure we really shouldn't do an automatism like that. This is
> very opaque to the user, easily appears random, and certainly deoesn't
> help uniformity, testability, or documentability.
Why should this be relevant for the user? This is an internal
imple
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/17/2013 04:50 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 17.06.13 22:12, Tom Gundersen ([email protected]) wrote:
>
>>> The only case, where this scheme would fail, is if you backup and
>>> restore a system to a different partitioning scheme.
>>
>> I
Lennart Poettering [2013-06-17 18:28 +0200]:
> On Mon, 17.06.13 06:41, Martin Pitt ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> > > No, by placing it in /usr (or /lib, for old distributions which haven't
> > > done the /usr merge yet) you break the rule that the files the systemd
> > > package installs in
Lennart Poettering [2013-06-17 18:27 +0200]:
> We try to push some of the more exotic device metadata into the
> respective packages and the developers of those packages should be
> able to rely on being able to drop in additional hwdb and have
> things work everywhere. If Ubuntu then goes and does
On Mon, 17.06.13 22:12, Tom Gundersen ([email protected]) wrote:
> > The only case, where this scheme would fail, is if you backup and
> > restore a system to a different partitioning scheme.
>
> I agree with Lennart that we don't want this scheme, but rather
> something predictable.
>
> How about Co
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> How about Colin's suggestion of putting hwdb.bin (and similar files
> that cannot always be in /var/cache) in /etc/cache?
Well, it's not a "cache", it will not be re-created automatically like
a cache, and it will not work with the file mis
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:23:53PM +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>> > In fact, we should really just delete the firmware logic from udev
>> > entirely now that the kernel doesn't even call it anymo
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:23:53PM +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > In fact, we should really just delete the firmware logic from udev
> > entirely now that the kernel doesn't even call it anymore, right?
>
> This fimware logic is not compiled by d
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> In fact, we should really just delete the firmware logic from udev
> entirely now that the kernel doesn't even call it anymore, right?
This fimware logic is not compiled by default, but for people with old
kernels it can be enabled with a configur
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I guess we can all agree that the cache file in /etc is not really nice and
> that
> /etc/ld.so.cache already exists, doesn't really make that better.
> A 5+ MB blob is really annoying, especially if you use tools like etckeeper.
> Putting t
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 03:17:12PM +0900, WaLyong Cho wrote:
> From: WaLyong Cho
>
> We can specify firmware path using "--with-firmware-path" configure
> option.
> In some of system, firmware can be located in subdirectories of the
> firmware path.
> If there are many firmware directories in bel
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 12:09:53AM +0200, Michał Bartoszkiewicz wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Ross Lagerwall
>> wrote:
>> > OK, thanks. But my testing shows otherwise: I created a .conf file with:
>> > net.ipv4.conf.enp1s0.fo
On Thu, 13.06.13 08:46, Ross Lagerwall ([email protected]) wrote:
> -r = unit_add_dependency_by_name(u, UNIT_CONFLICTS,
> SPECIAL_UMOUNT_TARGET, NULL, true);
> -if (r < 0)
> -goto fail;
> +if (!path_equal(where, "/") &&
'Twas brillig, and Lennart Poettering at 17/06/13 19:49 did gyre and gimble:
> On Thu, 13.06.13 22:13, Colin Guthrie ([email protected]) wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> If a mount has the x-initrd.mount option shouldn't it be excluded from
>> the umount loop during shutdown?
>>
>> I've looked at the code
On Thu, 13.06.13 21:28, Umut Tezduyar ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Umut Tezduyar wrote:
> > systemd starts using journal as soon as the journal
> > socket is in listening state instead of waiting for
> > journal's socket to switch to 'running' state.
> > ---
>
On Thu, 13.06.13 21:26, Umut Tezduyar ([email protected]) wrote:
> systemd starts using journal as soon as the journal
> socket is in listening state instead of waiting for
> journal's socket to switch to 'running' state.
> ---
> src/core/manager.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 de
On Fri, 14.06.13 14:33, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ([email protected]) wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:03:00AM +0200, Łukasz Stelmach wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > We are converting some daemons to socket activation. Most of them open
> > unix sockets and manage incoming connections in a main-loop,
On Thu, 13.06.13 22:13, Colin Guthrie ([email protected]) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If a mount has the x-initrd.mount option shouldn't it be excluded from
> the umount loop during shutdown?
>
> I've looked at the code but I don't see where they would be excluded.
>
> The reason I ask is that a user a
On Mon, 17.06.13 19:43, Michael Biebl ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> 2013/6/17 Kay Sievers :
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> >> Lennart Poettering [2013-06-17 2:52 +0200]:
> >>> The file is supposed to be be built on the installed system so that
> >>> other packages or
Dear list members,
I'm having some strange issues with systemd bootup being blocked by
waiting for devices that do already exist. The situation is a bit
complicated, but I'll try to be as clear as possible.
I have four encrypted partitions (dm-crypt, LUKS) on four different
disks set up by /etc/c
Before, "systemctl reenable [email protected]" would fail with:
Failed to issue method call: File exists
To fix this, reimplement "reenable" explicitly as a disable followed by
an enable.
This is shorter and is how the man page documents its behavior.
---
src/shared/install.c | 38 +
2013/6/17 Kay Sievers :
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> Lennart Poettering [2013-06-17 2:52 +0200]:
>>> The file is supposed to be be built on the installed system so that
>>> other packages or the admin can drop in additional hwdb files. And yes,
>>> it is not a package
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 06:40:54PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 13.06.13 13:20, Pablo Saratxaga ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm learning (and appreciating) the new systemd; and I'm currently trying to
> > make it work to load some firmware, in the most generic way.
On Thu, 13.06.13 13:20, Pablo Saratxaga ([email protected]) wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm learning (and appreciating) the new systemd; and I'm currently trying to
> make it work to load some firmware, in the most generic way.
>
> The hardware needing that firmware is a cheap bluetooth usb dongle;
> so c
On Sun, 16.06.13 19:18, David Greaves ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> On 06/06/13 08:33, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Sat, 18.05.13 23:44, Michael Scherer ([email protected]) wrote:
> >> So I planned to warn if the unit are directly in /lib, but I know there
> >> is some distribution that didn't
On Mon, 17.06.13 06:41, Martin Pitt ([email protected]) wrote:
> > No, by placing it in /usr (or /lib, for old distributions which haven't
> > done the /usr merge yet) you break the rule that the files the systemd
> > package installs in /usr should be the same on all installations of the
> >
On Mon, 17.06.13 06:35, Martin Pitt ([email protected]) wrote:
> Anyway, Lennart's and your responses have demonstrated that putting
> the cache into /etc wasn't by accident but deliberate; that's fine, so
> let's keep it as it is, and we keep the patch downstream for now. As
> it is it is tr
On Mon, 17.06.13 16:27, Maciej Wereski ([email protected]) wrote:
> This patch makes it possible to set extended attributes on files created
> by tmpfiles. This can be especially used to set SMACK security labels on
> volatile files and directories.
>
> To keep backwards compatibility
This patch makes it possible to set extended attributes on files created
by tmpfiles. This can be especially used to set SMACK security labels on
volatile files and directories.
To keep backwards compatibility Argument field is used. If word starts
with "xattr=", then it is cut out from Argument a
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:51:55AM +0400, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> I was testing behavior when syslog.service fails to start and found
> systemd taking 100% of CPU (core) time - 50% user, 50% system. See
>
> Is it possible to rate limit socket activated service? I do not see any
> parameters in s
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 12:09:53AM +0200, Michał Bartoszkiewicz wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Ross Lagerwall
> wrote:
> > OK, thanks. But my testing shows otherwise: I created a .conf file with:
> > net.ipv4.conf.enp1s0.forwarding=1
> > (where eth0 is the old name, enp1s0 is the new,
Heya,
in the past weeks we have been sitting down with the cgroup maintainer
in the kernel, Tejun Heo, at a number of conferences. During these
discussions it became very clear to us that the way systemd currently
exposes cgroups exposes too much of the guts of it, and is incompatible
with how the
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 8:17 AM, WaLyong Cho wrote:
> We can specify firmware path using "--with-firmware-path" configure
> option.
This was configurable because some systems had no /lib directory, it
is not meant to carry device or driver specific directories.
> In some of system, firmware can
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Lennart Poettering [2013-06-17 2:52 +0200]:
>> The file is supposed to be be built on the installed system so that
>> other packages or the admin can drop in additional hwdb files. And yes,
>> it is not a package manager controlled file, which
38 matches
Mail list logo
