This bug was fixed in the package systemd - 228-5ubuntu1
---
systemd (228-5ubuntu1) xenial; urgency=medium
* Merge with Debian unstable. Remaining Ubuntu changes:
- Hack to support system-image read-only /etc, and modify files in
/etc/writable/ instead.
- Simpler udev
Thank you for your input. It's not working how I want it to right now,
but I'm confident it can be done. I need to read up on systemd for this
to work.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/153
fwiw, halt-local.service was hooked up in final.target and contains the
following:
[Unit]
Description=/usr/sbin/halt.local Compatibility
ConditionFileIsExecutable=/usr/sbin/halt.local
DefaultDependencies=no
After=shutdown.target
Before=final.target
To apply that to my /etc/systemd/system/foo.serv
man bootup(7)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1532553
Title:
/etc/halt.local has become /usr/sbin/halt.local
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/u
Fair enough...
As mentioned earlier, this may be from a systemv time and perhaps from
Red Hat, I'm not sure. I do know that /usr/sbin/halt.local works in both
Wily and in debian 8 out of the box, the file is just located in dpkg-
managed space, which makes no sense.
Look, I'm not actually arguing
systemd.special(7) explains what they are, but if I could somehow get
the correlation between targets, that'd be cool
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1532553
Title:
/etc/halt.local has
Add a native service file and hook it up in the shutdown.target. That's
the cleanest solution.
/etc/systemd/system/foo.service
[Unit]
Description=Run service on shutdown
[Service]
ExecStart=/bin/true
[Install]
WantedBy=shutdown.target
--
You received this bug notification because you are a mem
Alright - Got your comments late, let me try that out
Are these targets documented somewhere, so it becomes clear exactly what
is started when?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1532553
T
Or make that
WantedBy=final.target, if you want to execute it during late shutdown.
See man systemd.special(7)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1532553
Title:
/etc/halt.local has becom
Also all other distros, regardless of init system, appears to have this
file somewhere. Bad solution IMHO
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1532553
Title:
/etc/halt.local has become /usr
> it's actually always worked
Not that I can see in Debian/Ubuntu -- there is no trace of it in
sysvinit or upstart..
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1532553
Title:
/etc/halt.local ha
Thowing user-managed executables in /lib/systemd/system-shutdown/ is not
much better than editing /usr/sbin/halt.local. Is there an /etc or a
/usr/local based version of this directory available somewhere, that
will work out of the box, then that will work for me, i guess.. I'll try
it out at least
Before the introduction of systemd in Debian and Ubuntu, /etc/halt.local was
not supported at all.
Neither sysvinit nor upstart executed that file/script. So I'm mildly suprised,
when you say "it always worked".
We decided to not introduce support for this legacy, sysv specific
service, which af
Check out systemd-halt.service(8), this provides a hook directory for
this kind of things.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1532553
Title:
/etc/halt.local has become /usr/sbin/halt.loca
In that case we are missing documentation for the shutdown/halt procedure more
than ever.
Very often halt.local is where we'd do stuff like powering off UPS outlets, to
handle power-outage scenarios properly. It may not have been documented or
placed ideally, but AFAIKT, it's actually always wor
After discussing with Michael Biebl we decided to drop this altogether:
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-
systemd/systemd.git/commit/?id=832bc79
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1532553
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-
systemd/systemd.git/commit/?id=944c47b
** Changed in: systemd (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1532553
Oh, I absolutely do agree that /usr/sbin/ is a really bad place.
/usr/local or /etc/ are better indeed. I was just wondering about what
precise path it should be, as I have never seen this documented or being
used in a Debian context.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
So it seems we are not actually breaking any backwards compatibility
here, so we could just use /etc/halt.local corresponding to
/etc/rc.local.
** Changed in: systemd (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Triaged
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, whic
Hmmm I can't seem to find it documented anywhere, but last time I needed
this to work was in the good old sysvinit days and it may have even been
on a different distro. Sorry for not brushing thoroughly up on this,
prior to filing this bug.
I have checked with CentOS 7 and it has the halt.local pl
This is indeed configurable with --with-rc-local-script-path-stop=.
However, I want to make sure we actually point it to a sensible value. I
can't find any reference to halt.local in Debian/Ubuntu. It seems
neither sysvinit nor upstart ever supported that file, so I don't think
there's any backward
You're absolutely right - Changed to systemd
** Package changed: transmission (Ubuntu) => systemd (Ubuntu)
** Changed in: systemd (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid => New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.lau
This seems to've been misfiled against the 'transmission' package, which
is a BitTorrent client and has nothing to do with system shutdown
scripts.
** Changed in: transmission (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, wh
23 matches
Mail list logo
