Re: [systemd-devel] Still confused with socket activation

2021-02-02 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 02.02.21 um 22:25 schrieb Benjamin Berg: On Tue, 2021-02-02 at 22:50 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: 02.02.2021 17:59, Lennart Poettering пишет: Note that Requires= in almost all cases should be combined with an order dep of After= onto the same unit. Years ago I asked for example when R

[systemd-devel] Limitation on maximum number of systemd timers that can be active

2021-02-02 Thread P.R.Dinesh
Do we have any limitation on the maximum number of systemd timers / units that can be active in the system? Will it consume high cpu/memory if we configure 1000s of systemd timers? -- With Kind Regards, P R Dinesh ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-

Re: [systemd-devel] udev blkid check on mmcblk0boot0 and boot1

2021-02-02 Thread Alan Perry
On 2/2/21 2:13 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote: Hi, On 2/2/21 1:46 PM, Alan Perry wrote: On 2/2/21 1:55 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mo, 01.02.21 16:36, Alan Perry ([email protected]) wrote: Hi, Per the udev rules, the blkid builtin is run on mmcblk*boot* devices to look for partition and fi

Re: [systemd-devel] udev blkid check on mmcblk0boot0 and boot1

2021-02-02 Thread Jeremy Linton
Hi, On 2/2/21 1:46 PM, Alan Perry wrote: On 2/2/21 1:55 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mo, 01.02.21 16:36, Alan Perry ([email protected]) wrote: Hi, Per the udev rules, the blkid builtin is run on mmcblk*boot* devices to look for partition and filesystem. Those devices contain hardware-s

Re: [systemd-devel] Still confused with socket activation

2021-02-02 Thread Benjamin Berg
On Tue, 2021-02-02 at 22:50 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > 02.02.2021 17:59, Lennart Poettering пишет: > > > > Note that Requires= in almost all cases should be combined with an > > order dep of After= onto the same unit. > > Years ago I asked for example when Requires makes sense without > Aft

Re: [systemd-devel] udev blkid check on mmcblk0boot0 and boot1

2021-02-02 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Di, 02.02.21 11:46, Alan Perry ([email protected]) wrote: > > On 2/2/21 1:55 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Mo, 01.02.21 16:36, Alan Perry ([email protected]) wrote: > > > Hi, Per the udev rules, the blkid builtin is run on mmcblk*boot* > > > devices to look for partition and filesyst

Re: [systemd-devel] Still confused with socket activation

2021-02-02 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Di, 02.02.21 22:50, Andrei Borzenkov ([email protected]) wrote: > 02.02.2021 17:59, Lennart Poettering пишет: > > > > Note that Requires= in almost all cases should be combined with an > > order dep of After= onto the same unit. > > Years ago I asked for example when Requires makes sense with

Re: [systemd-devel] Still confused with socket activation

2021-02-02 Thread Andrei Borzenkov
02.02.2021 17:59, Lennart Poettering пишет: > > Note that Requires= in almost all cases should be combined with an > order dep of After= onto the same unit. Years ago I asked for example when Requires makes sense without After. Care to show it? I assume you must have use case if you say "in almos

Re: [systemd-devel] udev blkid check on mmcblk0boot0 and boot1

2021-02-02 Thread Alan Perry
On 2/2/21 1:55 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mo, 01.02.21 16:36, Alan Perry ([email protected]) wrote: Hi, Per the udev rules, the blkid builtin is run on mmcblk*boot* devices to look for partition and filesystem. Those devices contain hardware-specific boot information and are unlikely

Re: [systemd-devel] Still confused with socket activation

2021-02-02 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Di, 02.02.21 10:43, Ulrich Windl ([email protected]) wrote: > Hi! > > Having: > --- > # /usr/lib/systemd/system/virtlockd.service > [Unit] > Description=Virtual machine lock manager > Requires=virtlockd.socket > Requires=virtlockd-admin.socket > Before=libvirtd.service > ... > -

Re: [systemd-devel] Is it intentional that "systemctl cat" outputs "# /dev/null" for a masked unit?

2021-02-02 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Di, 02.02.21 10:34, Ulrich Windl ([email protected]) wrote: > Well, > > the subject says it all: I had masked a socket unit and the related > non-socket-unit failed to start. > Trying to see the definition of the unit with "systemctl cat" I only saw "# > /dev/null". > Is that

Re: [systemd-devel] udev blkid check on mmcblk0boot0 and boot1

2021-02-02 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Mo, 01.02.21 16:36, Alan Perry ([email protected]) wrote: > > Hi, > > Per the udev rules, the blkid builtin is run on mmcblk*boot* devices to look > for partition and filesystem. Those devices contain hardware-specific boot > information and are unlikely to have anything on them that blkid wo

[systemd-devel] Still confused with socket activation

2021-02-02 Thread Ulrich Windl
Hi! Having: --- # /usr/lib/systemd/system/virtlockd.service [Unit] Description=Virtual machine lock manager Requires=virtlockd.socket Requires=virtlockd-admin.socket Before=libvirtd.service ... --- How would I start both sockets successfully unter program control? If I start one socket, I cannot

[systemd-devel] Is it intentional that "systemctl cat" outputs "# /dev/null" for a masked unit?

2021-02-02 Thread Ulrich Windl
Well, the subject says it all: I had masked a socket unit and the related non-socket-unit failed to start. Trying to see the definition of the unit with "systemctl cat" I only saw "# /dev/null". Is that intended? "systemctl show" still shows a lot of data... My idea was when "unmask" knows how