On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Matthew Hall wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 07:59:03AM +0200, Mantas Mikul??nas wrote:
> > I'm not sure if udev even still _allows_ renaming to eth*, but even if it
> > does, that's explicitly not supported. (For example, between the time
> eth0
> > appears and
Hello yankun,
yan...@iscas.ac.cn [2015-11-12 9:25 +0800]:
> Hey guys:
>I try install systemd(219) in linux-mint17 .the deb package is from
> Ubuntu15.04.except for I can not auto-mount my U disk and can configure the
> network parametric.But when I use root to login, there is no problem.
Hello Zbigniew,
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek [2015-11-12 6:39 +]:
> Installed size of systemd-udev is 6.5MB, systemd-container is 3.5MB,
> systemd is 19MB, so the gain is modest. We also lose some dependencies.
To compare with Debian: systemd: 17.5 MB, s-container 2.4 MB, udev 6.6
MB, so this
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 07:59:03AM +0200, Mantas Mikul??nas wrote:
> I'm not sure if udev even still _allows_ renaming to eth*, but even if it
> does, that's explicitly not supported. (For example, between the time eth0
> appears and the "rename to eth1" rule gets processed, another eth1 might
> al
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:40:04AM -0500, Matthew Hall wrote:
> The process for adding an account on the FDO wiki is extremely confusing for
> any non-expert users:
>
> http://wiki.freedesktop.org/sitewranglers/wiki/401/
>
> There is no way anybody that isn't a crypto geek will know how to do th
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 06:13:32AM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:58:14PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > in case it's useful, this is how we split them in Debian.
> >
> > However, is this even a topic for upstream, apart from giving
> > re
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:58:14PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> in case it's useful, this is how we split them in Debian.
>
> However, is this even a topic for upstream, apart from giving
> recommendations? I. e. do you actually consider putting this kind of
> split into the upstrea
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:13 PM, Steve Abner wrote:
> I have an issue of the console not turning back on. I have a new build,
> linux 4.2, amd64, systemd, kdbus
> on a mac mini. The first try was hybrib-sleep, failed so tried suspend.
> From journalctl there seems to be
> no related errors, one:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 7:40 AM, Matthew Hall wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:12:55AM -0500, Matthew Hall wrote:
> > /etc/udev/rules.d/70-net-names.rules:
> > SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*", SUBSYSTEM=="pci",
> KERNELS==":00:1f.6", NAME="eth0"
> > SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:33:52PM +0100, Lukáš Nykrýn wrote:
> > > systemd-firstboot (firstboot,sysusers?,factory stuff?)
> >
> > I'd really not bother with this stuff. This should be in the base,
> > and
> > it is tiny. Plese leave this in the main package.
>
> The only reason was that it pulls
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:12:55AM -0500, Matthew Hall wrote:
> /etc/udev/rules.d/70-net-names.rules:
> SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*", SUBSYSTEM=="pci",
> KERNELS==":00:1f.6", NAME="eth0"
> SUBSYSTEM=="net", ACTION=="add", DRIVERS=="?*", SUBSYSTEM=="pci",
> KERNELS==":08:
Hello all,
I am tearing my hair out trying to follow the directions in this page to get
the
correct interface names on Ubuntu Wily w/ systemd-udevd.
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames/
I am just trying to get my eth0 - eth3 into the desired order.
Should I have not said specifically Arch linux?
Is it something that can't be done?
It is something that should be so obvious it doesn't merit an answer?
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:56 PM, J Decker wrote:
> I have Arch Linux setup as my router.
> It's on a connection that can change the IP that I'
Hey guys:
I try install systemd(219) in linux-mint17 .the deb package is from
Ubuntu15.04.except for I can not auto-mount my U disk and can configure the
network parametric.But when I use root to login, there is no problem.
yan...@iscas.ac.cn
_
On 11.11.2015 12:58, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> in case it's useful, this is how we split them in Debian.
>
> However, is this even a topic for upstream, apart from giving
> recommendations? I. e. do you actually consider putting this kind of
> split into the upstream build system à la "
On 11.11.2015 16:28, Colin Guthrie wrote:
> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote on 11/11/15 13:38:
>> systemd-machine (machined,nspawn,importd)
We call that package "systemd-container", but it has exactly those, so
"check".
>> I think we (Fedora) should follow this, for inter-distr
Am 11.11.2015 um 22:30 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
On 11/11/2015 08:28 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
2015-11-11 21:21 GMT+01:00 Jóhann B. Guðmundsson :
[snip]
To coordinate and oversee and collectively share work done between
distribution integrating the relevant components in their distributio
Am 11.11.2015 um 22:38 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
On 11/11/2015 08:38 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.11.2015 um 21:21 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
Because these aren't development related discussion
this list was multiple times statet also as users-list by Lennart
himself, just use
On 11/11/2015 08:38 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.11.2015 um 21:21 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
On 11/11/2015 04:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.11.2015 um 17:03 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
On 11/11/2015 03:51 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Why not systemd-devel?
Becau
On 11/11/2015 08:28 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
2015-11-11 21:21 GMT+01:00 Jóhann B. Guðmundsson :
[snip]
To coordinate and oversee and collectively share work done between
distribution integrating the relevant components in their distribution.
And now you started an unrelated meta-discussion. P
I have an issue of the console not turning back on. I have a new build,
linux 4.2, amd64, systemd, kdbus
on a mac mini. The first try was hybrib-sleep, failed so tried suspend.
From journalctl there seems to be
no related errors, one:
systemd-networkd[289]: wlan0: DHCPv4 address 192.168.1.82/24
Am 11.11.2015 um 21:21 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
On 11/11/2015 04:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.11.2015 um 17:03 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
On 11/11/2015 03:51 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Why not systemd-devel?
Because these aren't development related discussion
2015-11-11 21:21 GMT+01:00 Jóhann B. Guðmundsson :
[snip]
> To coordinate and oversee and collectively share work done between
> distribution integrating the relevant components in their distribution.
And now you started an unrelated meta-discussion. Please do that in a
separate thread and don't h
On 11/11/2015 04:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 11.11.2015 um 17:03 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
On 11/11/2015 03:51 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Why not systemd-devel?
Because these aren't development related discussion
this list was multiple times statet also as users-list
On Tue, 10.11.15 11:12, Jordan Hargrave (jhar...@gmail.com) wrote:
> The patch will also decode SMBIOS slot number for NIC, and store in the
> variable
> ID_NET_NAME_SMBIOS_SLOT. Systemd does not have a method for naming
> ports on a multi-port card plugged into a slot.
> >>>
On 2015-11-10, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:23:50AM -0600, Ian Pilcher wrote:
>> Running Fedora 21 with systemd 216, and just discovered that journal
>> files are taking up 1.8G. I see references to "journalctl
>> --vacuum-time" on the interwebs, but that option
Am 11.11.2015 um 17:03 schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
On 11/11/2015 03:51 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Why not systemd-devel?
Because these aren't development related discussion
this list was multiple times statet also as users-list by Lennart
himself, just use Google to find th
On 11/11/2015 03:51 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Why not systemd-devel?
Because these aren't development related discussion and there is a need
for separated collaborated git repository to prevent duplication of
downstream work etc.
JBG
__
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 04:39:23PM +0100, Frank Steiner wrote:
> Isn't there an easy way to figure out if this script is running
> inside the boot process? Some variable set or not yet set?
You can use systemctl is-system-running (see the man page).
Zbyszek
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:43:51PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>
>
> On 11/11/2015 01:12 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> >2015-11-11 12:58 GMT+01:00 Martin Pitt :
> >>Hello all,
> >>
> >>in case it's useful, this is how we split them in Debian.
> >>
> >>However, is this even a topic for upstre
Am 11.11.2015 um 16:39 schrieb Frank Steiner:
Tomasz Torcz wrote
I would suggest splitting the "on boot only" part into separate
unit, with RemainAfterExit=true. The main part should require boot-only
part.
First of all, create a proper unit and drop LSB script.
This is not possible as it
On 11/11/2015 03:39 PM, Frank Steiner wrote:
If I was able to work with systemd unit files, I could perfectly
do what I want, but I'm stuck with this LSB file.
Why are you stuck with that lsb file and what exactly does it do?
( Paste the content of it )
JBG
___
The wording of your questions isn't clear to me. Do you mean that A and B
are socket-activated services, each requiring C? And when you say "the
message of A and the message of B," do you mean packets going to the
sockets for A and B?
If so, a packet going to A or B will also start C. The requests
On 11/11/2015 01:12 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
2015-11-11 12:58 GMT+01:00 Martin Pitt :
Hello all,
in case it's useful, this is how we split them in Debian.
However, is this even a topic for upstream, apart from giving
recommendations? I. e. do you actually consider putting this kind of
split
Tomasz Torcz wrote
> I would suggest splitting the "on boot only" part into separate
> unit, with RemainAfterExit=true. The main part should require boot-only
> part.
> First of all, create a proper unit and drop LSB script.
This is not possible as it is an opensuse system script that I cannot
r
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote on 11/11/15 13:38:
>>> > > systemd-machine (machined,nspawn,importd)
>> >
>> > We call that package "systemd-container", but it has exactly those, so
>> > "check".
> I think we (Fedora) should follow this, for inter-distro consistency.
I prefer that name to syst
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:58:14PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> in case it's useful, this is how we split them in Debian.
>
> However, is this even a topic for upstream, apart from giving
> recommendations? I. e. do you actually consider putting this kind of
> split into the upstrea
> > Lennart Poettering píše v St 11. 11. 2015 v 12:29 +0100:
>
> > systemd-networkd (maybe also with resolved?)
>
> I'd probably leave this in the main RPM, after all it doesn't take
> possession of any interfaces by default, but makes sure
> libsystemd-network returns useful stuff.
>
> But if y
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:17:59PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:03:10PM +0100, Frank Steiner wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > is there an easy way to figure out if a LSB script in /etc/init.d/
> > is called during bootup by systemd? I need to distinguish the first
> > execution du
2015-11-11 12:58 GMT+01:00 Martin Pitt :
> Hello all,
>
> in case it's useful, this is how we split them in Debian.
>
> However, is this even a topic for upstream, apart from giving
> recommendations? I. e. do you actually consider putting this kind of
> split into the upstream build system à la "m
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:58:14PM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Lukáš Nykrýn [2015-11-11 11:47 +0100]:
> > Personally I don't think it makes sense to split the package to get a
> > smaller core package. Most of our binaries are just few KBs.
>
> They are actually fairly big, 100 kB to 1.5 MB for sy
On 11/11/2015 11:58 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
However, is this even a topic for upstream,
I would argue not.
I would argue that this is a downstream collaboration matter in which a)
the split should be the same regardless of distribution and the sub
components should be split in same manner acr
On Wed, 11 Nov 2015, Lukáš Nykrýn wrote:
Hi,
During systemd.conf we have discussed some recommendation for
downstreams, how they could split systemd to subpackages, so lets
continue that discussion here.
Personally I don't think it makes sense to split the package to get a
smaller core package.
Hello all,
in case it's useful, this is how we split them in Debian.
However, is this even a topic for upstream, apart from giving
recommendations? I. e. do you actually consider putting this kind of
split into the upstream build system à la "make install-"?
Lukáš Nykrýn [2015-11-11 11:47 +0100]
On Wed, 11.11.15 11:47, Lukáš Nykrýn (lnyk...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> During systemd.conf we have discussed some recommendation for
> downstreams, how they could split systemd to subpackages, so lets
> continue that discussion here.
>
> Personally I don't think it makes sense to split the p
On Tue, 10.11.15 22:53, Igor Zhbanov (izh1...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I see lots of messages (with systemd debug enabled) on the kernel with
> selinux disabled:
> systemd[1]: Failed to determine peer security context: Protocol not available
>
> As I understand, this happen because getsockopt
> I thought the conscious was not recommending downstream to split
> systemd
> into subpackages?
>
I think the previous discussion was more about if we should split core
components of systemd like systemd-logind, which still should stay in
the main package.
And most of distributions split thei
On 11/11/2015 10:57 AM, Michal Sekletar wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
wrote:
I thought the conscious was not recommending downstream to split systemd
into subpackages?
This decision was recently (at systemd.conf) reevaluated :)
Not everybody can attend co
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:03:10PM +0100, Frank Steiner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> is there an easy way to figure out if a LSB script in /etc/init.d/
> is called during bootup by systemd? I need to distinguish the first
> execution during boot from subsequent calls (cron, manually etc.).
>
> It seems that
Hi,
is there an easy way to figure out if a LSB script in /etc/init.d/
is called during bootup by systemd? I need to distinguish the first
execution during boot from subsequent calls (cron, manually etc.).
It seems that /sbin/runlevel returns "unknown" during bootup, but
I'm not sure if this reli
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
wrote:
>
> I thought the conscious was not recommending downstream to split systemd
> into subpackages?
>
This decision was recently (at systemd.conf) reevaluated :)
Michal
___
systemd-devel maili
On 11/11/2015 10:47 AM, Lukáš Nykrýn wrote:
Hi,
During systemd.conf we have discussed some recommendation for
downstreams, how they could split systemd to subpackages, so lets
continue that discussion here.
I thought the conscious was not recommending downstream to split systemd
into subpac
Hi,
During systemd.conf we have discussed some recommendation for
downstreams, how they could split systemd to subpackages, so lets
continue that discussion here.
Personally I don't think it makes sense to split the package to get a
smaller core package. Most of our binaries are just few KBs. Onl
Hi guys:
How can I find what systemd does for sockets? For example,if A and B
requires C,and when C has not start,the message of A and the message of B is in
the same queue? or else? Thank you!
___
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.free
54 matches
Mail list logo
