On Thursday 05 June 2014 13:58:45 Mick wrote:
.., I've keyworded sys-power/upower-0.99.0 for now on one machine
and it seems to work fine, without imposing systemd at the moment. :-)
I bet you have quite a lot of systemd components lurking in the background
though, ready to take over the
On Friday 06 Jun 2014 00:15:02 Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Thursday 05 June 2014 13:58:45 Mick wrote:
.., I've keyworded sys-power/upower-0.99.0 for now on one machine
and it seems to work fine, without imposing systemd at the moment. :-)
I bet you have quite a lot of systemd components
On Tuesday 03 June 2014 10:39:10 »Q« wrote:
I figured out what I wanted to do (uninstall upower, install
upower-pm-utils) by reading the changelogs, but I don't know what my
other options were. Could I have stuck with upower, letting it pull in
systemd, without messing up openrc?
Apparently
On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 22:06:07 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
The good news is that the version of upower prior to this decision
still works fine and likely will for ages to come. That code has been
bundled into a new package upower-pm-utils.
Anyone that feels like doing
On 05/06/14 01:14, »Q« wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 22:06:07 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
The good news is that the version of upower prior to this decision
still works fine and likely will for ages to come. That code has been
bundled into a new package upower-pm-utils.
On Wednesday 04 Jun 2014 23:27:05 Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 05/06/14 01:14, »Q« wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 22:06:07 +0200
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
The good news is that the version of upower prior to this decision
still works fine and likely will for ages to come.
On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 18:14:56 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
(I think I'll be forced to write up some minimal news item just to
shut up the loud minority who can't be bothered to do anything
themselfs, like even read package ChangeLogs if they stumble upon
something manual.)
Am 08.04.2014 07:24, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
I just looked up what systemd-networkd and virt-manager do.
No tap-devices here when I run a local VM ... so I might review the
openrc-script for reference.
edited and tested the bridge.service:
Am 06.04.2014 15:02, schrieb Tom H:
So the openrc-example might be simplified? ok with me ... does anyone
confirm?
It depends how you set up your network on the qemu command line.
If you use qemu -netdev tap,id=hn0,script=no,downscript=no ..., you need
to set up a tap.
If you use
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Stefan G. Weichinger li...@xunil.at wrote:
Am 06.04.2014 15:02, schrieb Tom H:
So the openrc-example might be simplified? ok with me ... does anyone
confirm?
It depends how you set up your network on the qemu command line.
If you use qemu -netdev
Am 07.04.2014 19:14, schrieb Tom H:
You're welcome.
I've never used virt-manager but I assume that it functions like
virt-install or that it uses virt-install under the gui.
If that's the case, it won't use predefined tap devices, slaved to a
bridge or not. It'll create vnetX tap devices
Stefan G. Weichinger lists at xunil.at writes:
Am 31.03.2014 14:17, schrieb Nilesh Govindrajan:
On 31-Mar-2014 5:45 pm, Stefan G. Weichinger lists at xunil.at
wrote:
Aside from all the discussions around systemd, I simply gave the new
systemd-networkd a try.
It helped me to simplify my
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:48:01 +, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk
wrote:
I thought I'd have another look at systemd, so switched profiles, made
sure I had all the kernel options needed and then did an emerge -uN
world.
It seems the systemd profile masks the static and static-libs USE
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 11:24:05 -0500, Tanstaafl
tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
Hi all,
Ok, before I go and open up a bug requesting this...
I know there have to be a lot of people on this list who can answer
this question...
Is making the use of systemd or not based on a selected
On 2014-02-18 11:39 AM, eroen er...@falcon.eroen.eu wrote:
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014 11:24:05 -0500, Tanstaafl
tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
Hi all,
Ok, before I go and open up a bug requesting this...
I know there have to be a lot of people on this list who can answer
this question...
Is
On 12/07/2013 05:58 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
On Sat, Dec 07 2013, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Dec 7, 2013 12:40 PM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
Just updated my stable amd64 machine to use systemd and all is working
okay except for the lvm.service.
The lvm.service starts with no
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 10:15 AM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/07/2013 05:58 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
On Sat, Dec 07 2013, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Dec 7, 2013 12:40 PM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
Just updated my stable amd64 machine to use systemd and all is working
okay
On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 11:12:23 -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
It has the same problem. I looked more carefully at the systemd logs
and found that lvm was running before the xhci kernel module was
loaded, hence the usb3 drive was not visible yet.
I fixed the problem by adding
On 12/08/2013 10:39 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 11:12:23 -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
It has the same problem. I looked more carefully at the systemd logs
and found that lvm was running before the xhci kernel module was
loaded, hence the usb3 drive was not visible yet.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/12/13 09:36, walt wrote:
On 12/08/2013 10:39 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 11:12:23 -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
It has the same problem. I looked more carefully at the systemd logs
and found that lvm was running before
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 4:36 PM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/08/2013 10:39 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 11:12:23 -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
It has the same problem. I looked more carefully at the systemd logs
and found that lvm was running before the xhci kernel
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Sam Jorna sam.t.jo...@gmail.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/12/13 09:36, walt wrote:
On 12/08/2013 10:39 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 8 Dec 2013 11:12:23 -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
It has the same problem. I looked
On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 01:43:37 -0500
Jonathan Callen jcal...@gentoo.org wrote:
Udev as installed by sys-fs/udev is *exactly* the same as udev
installed by sys-apps/systemd, except that the latter installs more
files. It is very much possible to switch to systemd as your udev
provider without
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 12/06/2013 05:44 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
On Fri, December 6, 2013 08:53, Michael Hampicke wrote:
Just remove init=/usr/lib/systemd/systemd from your kernel command line,
and you can boot
your old openrc installation (if you did un unmerge
Daniel Campbell wrote:
Do you know the design consequences of opt-in versus opt-out? I'll keep
this short: When evolving a codebase, new behavior for core parts of the
system should not be pushed or forced on users. If you must, keep the
old behavior around as a default and allow users to try
On 10/23/2013 05:51 PM, Steven J. Long wrote:
Daniel Campbell wrote:
Do you know the design consequences of opt-in versus opt-out? I'll keep
this short: When evolving a codebase, new behavior for core parts of the
system should not be pushed or forced on users. If you must, keep the
old
pk pete...@coolmail.se wrote:
Seriously, boot-critical would be something that the system cannot *boot
without*, which belongs in /. Everything else should be in /usr, i.e.
non-boot-critical. How hard is it to start *non-boot* (system) critical
*after* boot (things like sshd)? I do that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 09/04/2013 11:12 AM, Frank Steinmetzger wrote:
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 09:16:55AM -0500, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Well, it’s an experiment, but I’m still quite hesitant to switch. It really
shuts down fast
(1 to 2 seconds or so), but I
On 07/26/2013 06:39 AM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
must I check that every entry previously in /etc/init.d now has an entry
in /usr/lib/systemd/system? What do I do if there is no corresponding
entry?
I actually had to write a few of my own *.service files, which belong in
/etc/systemd/system/
walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/26/2013 06:39 AM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
must I check that every entry previously in /etc/init.d now has an entry
in /usr/lib/systemd/system? What do I do if there is no corresponding
entry?
I actually had to write a few of my own *.service files,
systemd.unit (5)
systemd.service (5)
On Jul 28, 2013 6:26 AM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/26/2013 06:39 AM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
must I check that every entry previously in /etc/init.d now has an
entry
in /usr/lib/systemd/system? What do I do if
Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote:
systemd.unit (5)
systemd.service (5)
On Jul 28, 2013 6:26 AM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/26/2013 06:39 AM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote:
must I check that every entry previously in /etc/init.d now has an
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Jonathan Callen jcal...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 07/25/2013 11:42 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Michael Hampicke m...@hadt.biz
wrote:
What do you use - and what are the benefits of your method?
I use the following unit in one of
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:04 AM, András Csányi sayusi.a...@sayusi.hu wrote:
On 23 July 2013 08:54, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/07/13 08:43, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 23/07/13 00:46, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
This would be
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:28 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:04 AM, András Csányi sayusi.a...@sayusi.hu wrote:
On 23 July 2013 08:54, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/07/13 08:43, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:28 PM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:04 AM, András Csányi sayusi.a...@sayusi.hu
wrote:
On 23 July 2013 08:54, Nikos Chantziaras
On 23/07/13 08:43, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 23/07/13 00:46, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
This would be a lot less of an issue if someone just wrote a logind
ebuild (wink wink) that provides consolekit like it was originally
intended.
not possible, logind since systemd = 205 requires systemd and
On 23 July 2013 08:54, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/07/13 08:43, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 23/07/13 00:46, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
This would be a lot less of an issue if someone just wrote a logind
ebuild (wink wink) that provides consolekit like it was originally
On 23/07/13 09:54, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 23/07/13 08:43, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 23/07/13 00:46, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
This would be a lot less of an issue if someone just wrote a logind
ebuild (wink wink) that provides consolekit like it was originally
intended.
not possible,
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:04 AM, András Csányi sayusi.a...@sayusi.hu wrote:
On 23 July 2013 08:54, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/07/13 08:43, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 23/07/13 00:46, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
This would be a lot less of an issue if someone just wrote a
On 13/02/2013 06:13, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:23 PM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
IOW, try gnome3 on a virtual machine first :)
I think it would be easier if you tried a LiveCD:
http://www.gnome.org/getting-gnome/
For what is worth, I find myself more
On 02/13/2013 04:23 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
All the progress I see from Gnome3 (and I get this only from blog posts
on the tubes) is that stuff is being ripped out and replaced with mostly
nothing.
That's exactly my problem with gnome3 in a sentence. I don't hate gnome-shell
as an interface,
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 8:12 AM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/13/2013 04:23 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
All the progress I see from Gnome3 (and I get this only from blog posts
on the tubes) is that stuff is being ripped out and replaced with mostly
nothing.
That's exactly my problem with
I'm happy to be shown to be wrong and to be shown where Gnome3 has merit
for being itself, where it can proudly stand on it's own. But I'm just
not seeing it yet
I thought the following brilliant feature was obvious?
So your Gran has absolutely no chance of finding the power off button
so
On 13/02/13 at 12:39pm, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Purely out of morbid curiosity, I've just spent an hour playing with the
Gnome 3 LiveCd in a VM.
What I'm seeing is a KDE4 ripoff, done badly, plus a few MacOS-isms and
some ideas from Unity:
- Highly generic launcher on the left, just like
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Kevin Chadwick ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
I'm happy to be shown to be wrong and to be shown where Gnome3 has merit
for being itself, where it can proudly stand on it's own. But I'm just
not seeing it yet
I thought the following brilliant feature was
If you can't find the power off button in a modern GNOME installation
you have to be quite blind... of course, I don't even use it when I
have it, powering off from the console and all.
I guess you haven't seen the mountains of users who didn't consider
holding ALT to change the suspend option
On Wed, Feb 13 2013, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
If you can't find the power off button in a modern GNOME installation
you have to be quite blind... of course, I don't even use it when I
have it, powering off from the console and all.
I guess you haven't seen the mountains of users who didn't
On 02/12/2013 12:26 PM, Randy Barlow wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
GNOME 3.6 is not masked in Gentoo, just keyworded.
Apologies for the slight thread hijack, but I've been curious if anyone
knows the current state of Gnome 3 in Gentoo?
Heh. That's a complicated
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:23 PM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
IOW, try gnome3 on a virtual machine first :)
I think it would be easier if you tried a LiveCD:
http://www.gnome.org/getting-gnome/
For what is worth, I find myself more productive and much more at ease
with GNOME 3 than with
Thanks for the reply! I agree that it is complicated, and that the direction of
Gnome is mysterious. I've been using it at work, and I've enjoyed some things
about it. Some other choices are puzzling. I'm interested to stick around to
see where it will go.
On 11/11/2012 07:58 PM, Aaron Russell wrote:
I was having the same problem.
I had found and nfs package for fedora and in it had the .service
files. I used those and got it to work.
Good clue, thanks. Just for fun I did a virtualbox install of Fedora 17
because I haven't tried it for years,
On 09/25/2012 08:21 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Do
you need remote filesystem support? If not, then don't worry about it;
but if you want to find the problem, send the output from systemctl
status remote-fs.target. Mine is:
# systemctl status remote-fs.target
remote-fs.target - Remote File
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 8:11 AM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/25/2012 08:21 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Do
you need remote filesystem support? If not, then don't worry about it;
but if you want to find the problem, send the output from systemctl
status remote-fs.target. Mine is:
On 09/25/2012 02:42 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:24 PM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
I just installed and booted with systemd and most services are working
normally, except syslog.service and remote-fs.service. Both of those
failed on bootup with a No such file or
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 6:56 PM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/25/2012 02:42 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:24 PM, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote:
I just installed and booted with systemd and most services are working
normally, except syslog.service and
On Thu, March 22, 2012 12:55 am, Walter Dnes wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:02:32PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote
I said this before, but it sounds useful to try to reiterate:
* It's probable that service-specific files should not be included in
the init system package.
* Service-specific
From: Walter Dnes [mailto:waltd...@waltdnes.org]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 5:14 PM
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 09:35:55PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote
What we're talking about with systemd vs openrc, and things like ssh'd
first-time initialization is all within the realm of responsibility
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 09:35:55PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote
What we're talking about with systemd vs openrc, and things like ssh'd
first-time initialization is all within the realm of responsibility of
the packager. It's a shift in the way the distribution itself works.
We're not talking
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 09:35:55PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote
What we're talking about with systemd vs openrc, and things like ssh'd
first-time initialization is all within the realm of responsibility of
the packager.
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 01:18:24AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
I'm not sure where you're going with this. We're discussing an init
system and good, simple ways to start services. App maintainers are
going to continue to do whatever they feel they ought to do, some might
write the systemd
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:40:27 -0400
Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 01:18:24AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
I'm not sure where you're going with this. We're discussing an init
system and good, simple ways to start services. App maintainers are
going to
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 00:40:27 -0400
Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 01:18:24AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
I'm not sure where you're going with this. We're discussing an init
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:02:32PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote
I said this before, but it sounds useful to try to reiterate:
* It's probable that service-specific files should not be included in
the init system package.
* Service-specific init files should probably be part of the
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:02:32PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote
I said this before, but it sounds useful to try to reiterate:
* It's probable that service-specific files should not be included in
the init system package.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 22:48:54 -0400 (EDT), Bruce Hill, Jr. wrote:
And for the Lennart fanboi, his coding is
so questionable that Lennartware has become derogatory slang. (Of
course, you already know that.)
And this is such a common term nowadays that when Googling for
Lennartware only one
i want to try this systemd thingy, where do is start at?
i have a vm for testing and i might will adopt it on the real one.
Thanks,
Eliezer
On 18/03/2012 09:28, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
it
or at least try it, and given the level of discussion you present, I'm
starting to think you don't
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:45:06 -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
* Really good in-site customization: The service unit files are
trivially overrided with custom ones for specific installations,
without needing to touch the ones installed by systemd or a program.
With OpenRC, if I modify a
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 02:49:56 -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
They ensure that there is an sshd configuration file and
give a meaningful message (including where to find the sample) if it
is not present, and check for the presence of the hostkeys (again
which are needed) and create them
Eliezer Croitoru writes:
i want to try this systemd thingy, where do is start at?
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Systemd
Wonko
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 02:49:56 -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
They ensure that there is an sshd configuration file and
give a meaningful message (including where to find the sample) if it
is not present, and check
On March 19, 2012 at 9:13 AM Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 22:48:54 -0400 (EDT), Bruce Hill, Jr. wrote:
And for the Lennart fanboi, his coding is
so questionable that Lennartware has become derogatory slang. (Of
course, you already know that.)
And this
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:35:26AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
systemd is like Captain Picard of STTNG (Start Trek The Next
Generation) always saying make it so. *HOW DO YOU MAKE IT SO?
That intelligence has to be somewhere. So what alternative do you
propose? A bash or ash script is
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:33:11 -0400 (EDT), Bruce Hill, Jr. wrote:
And for the Lennart fanboi, his coding is
so questionable that Lennartware has become derogatory slang. (Of
course, you already know that.)
And this is such a common term nowadays that when Googling for
Lennartware
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 18:58:22 -0400
Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:35:26AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
systemd is like Captain Picard of STTNG (Start Trek The Next
Generation) always saying make it so. *HOW DO YOU MAKE IT SO?
That intelligence has
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Bruce Hill, Jr.
da...@happypenguincomputers.com wrote:
On March 17, 2012 at 10:57 PM Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Bruce Hill, Jr.
da...@happypenguincomputers.com wrote:
On March 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com writes:
* Really simple service unit files: The service unit files are really
small, really simple, really easy to understand/modify. Compare the 9
lines of sshd.service:
$ cat /etc/systemd/system/sshd.service
[Unit]
Description=SSH Secure Shell Service
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Graham Murray gra...@gmurray.org.uk wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com writes:
* Really simple service unit files: The service unit files are really
small, really simple, really easy to understand/modify. Compare the 9
lines of sshd.service:
$ cat
On Mar 18, 2012 3:52 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
If the config file doesn't exists, the service will not start, and you
can check the reason why with
systemctl status sshd.service
And of course you can set another mini sevice unit file to create the
hostkeys. But I
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:45:06 -0600
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
* Finally, and what I think is the most fundamental difference between
systemd and almost any other init system: The service unit files in
systemd are *declarative*; you tell the daemon *what* to do, not *how*
to
Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:45:06 -0600
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
* Finally, and what I think is the most fundamental difference between
systemd and almost any other init system: The service unit files in
systemd are *declarative*; you tell the daemon
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote:
On Mar 18, 2012 3:52 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
If the config file doesn't exists, the service will not start, and you
can check the reason why with
systemctl status sshd.service
And of course you
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote:
On Mar 18, 2012 3:52 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
If the config file doesn't exists, the service will not start, and you
can
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 13:25:32 -0600
Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
Or, said configuration files might be corrupted; the OpenRC
initscript -- if written defensively -- will be able to detect that
and (perhaps) fallback to something sane. systemd can't do that,
short of putting
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 01:25:32PM -0600, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote:
On Mar 18, 2012 3:52 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
If the config file doesn't exists, the service will not start, and you
can
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 03:15:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
Here's what I want:
When the machine starts, I want services X, Y and Z to run. The
software figures out what order they must start in and how the deps
work. Clean, neat, easy.
systemd is like Captain Picard of STTNG (Start
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 18:23:37 -0400
Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 03:15:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
Here's what I want:
When the machine starts, I want services X, Y and Z to run. The
software figures out what order they must start in and how the
On 17/03/12 13:53, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Hello, Nikos.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 08:25:48AM +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
Happy Computer Users, systemd is on your horizon.
No, we don't. I hope systemd arrives soon. It's the best init system I
ever saw.
What's so good about it? What
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/03/12 13:53, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Hello, Nikos.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 08:25:48AM +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
Happy Computer Users, systemd is on your horizon.
No, we don't. I hope systemd arrives
On 18/03/12 03:45, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Nikos Chantziarasrea...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/03/12 13:53, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Hello, Nikos.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 08:25:48AM +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
Happy Computer Users, systemd is on your
On Mar 18, 2012 8:48 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 17/03/12 13:53, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Hello, Nikos.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 08:25:48AM +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
Happy Computer
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote:
On Mar 18, 2012 8:48 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 17/03/12 13:53, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Hello, Nikos.
On Sat, Mar
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:12 PM, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18/03/12 03:45, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
snip
[...]
* It tries to unify Linux behaviour among distros (some can argue that
this is a bad thing): Using systemd, the same
configurations/techniques work the same
On March 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/03/12 13:53, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Hello, Nikos.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 08:25:48AM +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
Happy Computer Users, systemd is on your horizon.
No, we don't. I hope systemd
On Mar 18, 2012 9:44 AM, Joshua Murphy poiso...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:12 PM, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 18/03/12 03:45, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
snip
[...]
* It tries to unify Linux behaviour among distros (some can argue that
this is a bad
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Bruce Hill, Jr.
da...@happypenguincomputers.com wrote:
On March 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/03/12 13:53, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
Hello, Nikos.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 08:25:48AM +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On March 17, 2012 at 9:45 PM Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com
wrote:
But again, remember that I'm biased: I keep an overlay to run Gentoo
systems with only systemd; no OpenRC, no baselayout, no SysV. You guys
can try it if you want:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 9:02 PM, Bruce Hill, Jr.
da...@happypenguincomputers.com wrote:
On March 17, 2012 at 9:45 PM Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com
wrote:
But again, remember that I'm biased: I keep an overlay to run Gentoo
systems with only systemd; no OpenRC, no baselayout, no
On March 17, 2012 at 10:57 PM Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Bruce Hill, Jr.
da...@happypenguincomputers.com wrote:
On March 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 17/03/12 13:53, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
On 08/30/2011 04:56 AM, Alex Schuster wrote:
Alan McKinnon writes:
dbus-daemon often uses 10-20% of my CPU according to top.
Have you tried using dbus-monitor? It may tell you if some app is
being inappropriate.
101 - 200 of 202 matches
Mail list logo
