On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> Is the use of /dev/sd* in the fstab racey in some way?
>
> Btrfs multi-device volumes need all be known to the kernel before
> mount can succeed.
>
> Which one of the device is given to mount does not matter, they all
> result in the same vol
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Garry T. Williams wrote:
> On 7-28-13 01:14:55 Tom Gundersen wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Garry T. Williams
>> wrote:
>> > /etc/fstab:
>> >
>> > /dev/sda4 /home btrfs noatime 0 0
>> >
>> > The /home file system is a raid1 btrfs across two identi
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Garry T. Williams wrote:
> On 7-26-13 00:41:11 Michael Biebl wrote:
> > 2013/7/25 William Giokas <[email protected]>:
> > > Moved zsh shell completion to shell-completion/zsh/_systemd for
> > > automake's sake. Also allow users to specify where the files
> > > shou
On 7-28-13 01:14:55 Tom Gundersen wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Garry T. Williams
> wrote:
> > /etc/fstab:
> >
> > /dev/sda4 /home btrfs noatime 0 0
> >
> > The /home file system is a raid1 btrfs across two identical drive
> > partitions, sda4 and sdb4.
>
> I believe you want to
El 27/07/13 19:14, Tom Gundersen escribió:
I believe you want to use UUID, rather than the name of one of your
devices (see "lsblk -f").
It also fails to umount here with v206, however I am using UUID instead
of device names.
___
systemd-devel ma
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Garry T. Williams
wrote:
> Recently, my /home file system fails to mount during boot. The
> relevant message is:
>
> systemd[1]: Job dev-sda4.device/start timed out.
> systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for device dev-sda4.device.
>
> I'm dropped to a prompt f
On 7-26-13 00:41:11 Michael Biebl wrote:
> 2013/7/25 William Giokas <[email protected]>:
> > Moved zsh shell completion to shell-completion/zsh/_systemd for
> > automake's sake. Also allow users to specify where the files
> > should go with::
> >
> > ./configure --with-zshcompletiondir=/path/to/s
Recently, my /home file system fails to mount during boot. The
relevant message is:
systemd[1]: Job dev-sda4.device/start timed out.
systemd[1]: Timed out waiting for device dev-sda4.device.
I'm dropped to a prompt for root's password and after receiving a
shell prompt, the command "moun
Hello,
I'm happily using systemd 204 user instance to handle my desktop (xorg, awesome
wm, mpd, etc.) in Arch. I started experimenting with systemd 206 trying to adapt
my setup to the changes in cgroups, slices, and all that.
In 206, systemd user session is started automatically by pam_systemd w
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Oleksii Shevchuk wrote:
>> For most other things: there are actually very few things that should
>> use the environment as a data store and to pass around
>> config/policy/runtime information; it's just a too broken and static
>> model that should no be used in thi
> For most other things: there are actually very few things that should
> use the environment as a data store and to pass around
> config/policy/runtime information; it's just a too broken and static
> model that should no be used in this century.
Probably yes. But who and when will reimplement al
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Brandon Philips wrote:
> Attaching the patch since I don't have a mail client at the moment
> that can keep itself from breaking patches.
No problem, attachments are totally fine on this list.
Applied.
Thanks,
Kay
___
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Oleksii Shevchuk wrote:
>> It is, and always was, designed as a --user daemon, just like the name
>> suggests, not as a session daemon. With the upcoming kdbus work,
>> systemd --user will be the creator and owner of the user's bus, and
>> there can and should only
> It is, and always was, designed as a --user daemon, just like the name
> suggests, not as a session daemon. With the upcoming kdbus work,
> systemd --user will be the creator and owner of the user's bus, and
> there can and should only be one per user and no per session.
I understand this. But..
Attaching the patch since I don't have a mail client at the moment
that can keep itself from breaking patches.
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Brandon Philips wrote:
> The volatile path was '/run/systemd/systemd' when it should be
> '/run/systemd/system'. Fix.
> ---
> man/systemd.unit.xml | 2 +
The volatile path was '/run/systemd/systemd' when it should be
'/run/systemd/system'. Fix.
---
man/systemd.unit.xml | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/man/systemd.unit.xml b/man/systemd.unit.xml
index f6a0791..2f65ec6 100644
--- a/man/systemd.unit.xml
+++ b/man/sys
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Oleksii Shevchuk wrote:
>
>> It all needs still some work how things should work in the end
>
> Unfortunately, with shared session daemon
It is, and always was, designed as a --user daemon, just like the name
suggests, not as a session daemon. With the upcoming kd
> It all needs still some work how things should work in the end
Unfortunately, with shared session daemon there is no way to have
display session managed by systemd -- too many problems should be
solved. Mainly with attaching services to active seat/session (for
polkit), environment propagation
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Léo Gillot-Lamure
wrote:
> All these big changes from systemd 205 seem good and yummy, but how do this
> relates to the systemd --user sessions ?
>
> I used to launch all my desktop components (WM, panel, applets,
> pulseaudio...) using systemd user units, systemd
Hi.
All these big changes from systemd 205 seem good and yummy, but how do this
relates to the systemd --user sessions ?
I used to launch all my desktop components (WM, panel, applets,
pulseaudio...) using systemd user units, systemd --user itself being
launched by my display manager, but now it
20 matches
Mail list logo
