On Thu, 23.01.14 11:27, David Timothy Strauss (da...@davidstrauss.net) wrote:
Has anyone looked at using socketat() for this? It's unclear whether
that syscall actually exists in any supported form; it's certainly not
documented.
[1] http://lwn.net/Articles/407495/
I don't think this has
On Thu, 23.01.14 13:54, Ben Boeckel (maths...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi,
As I mused on LWN[1] recently, I was wondering whether it was possible
to have user units be able to hook into namespaces (namely the
PrivateNetwork= and PrivateTmp= from systemd.exec(5) and more if other
namespacing
On Tue, 21.01.14 16:39, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
This is a follow-up on this thread about directing the journal to a btrfs
subvolume, if it's desired to maintain one journal even when booting other
snapshots (such as doing a rollback):
On Thu, 23.01.14 15:21, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com) wrote:
Yeah, that vtnr=2 line is wrong. You really shouldn't set any VTNR if
seat!=seat0. I think the correct fix would be to set vtnr=0 in
get_seat_from_display() in pam-module.c if we're not on seat0.
Yeah, I agree with this.
On Thu, 23.01.14 11:55, Barry Scott (barry.sc...@onelan.co.uk) wrote:
I am running systemd 208 on Fedora 20.
There are 2 cpu cgroup attributes that I need to set to allow realtime for
some daemons: cpu.rt_period_us and cpu.rt_runtime_us.
For the memory cgroup I need to set
On Thu, 23.01.14 10:51, Marwan Rabbâa (wagha...@gmail.com) wrote:
[Install]
WantedBy=gitlab.target
* gitlab-unicorn.service *
[Unit]
Description=GitLab Unicorn Server
[Service]
User=git
WorkingDirectory=/var/www/gitlab
Environment=RAILS_ENV=production
On Thu, 23.01.14 01:34, Ronny Chevalier (chevalier.ro...@gmail.com) wrote:
---
Hi,
This patch ports the syscall filter to libseccomp. It can be disable with
--disable-seccomp and is enabled by default if libseccomp is present.
Maybe I should add a warning when parsing SyscallFilter in a
There doesn't appear to be any way to convince systemd
to abandon utterly unimportant stop jobs during
shutdown and advance to actually important things
like cleanly syncing and un-mounting local hard
disks.
For example, there are bugs like this:
On Fri, 24.01.14 09:53, Tom Horsley (horsley1...@gmail.com) wrote:
There doesn't appear to be any way to convince systemd
to abandon utterly unimportant stop jobs during
shutdown and advance to actually important things
like cleanly syncing and un-mounting local hard
disks.
For example,
Am 24.01.2014 16:03, schrieb Lennart Poettering:
It is our job to shutdown all services cleanly. A number of services
needs this, since they need to bring their files into a safe state
before quitting, and mark them as offline. We cannot just drop that.
Note however, that we add have
On Fri, 24.01.14 16:09, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote:
Am 24.01.2014 16:03, schrieb Lennart Poettering:
It is our job to shutdown all services cleanly. A number of services
needs this, since they need to bring their files into a safe state
before quitting, and mark them as
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut down cleanly and in the right order.
I didn't ask for any change to any default, I just asked for
users to be able to make the shutdown process proceed when
they have more information than systemd
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 11:07:18 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 23.01.14 13:54, Ben Boeckel (maths...@gmail.com) wrote:
As I mused on LWN[1] recently, I was wondering whether it was possible
to have user units be able to hook into namespaces (namely the
PrivateNetwork= and
On Friday 24 January 2014 at 16:15:04, Lennart wrote:
On Fri, 24.01.14 16:09, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote:
Am 24.01.2014 16:03, schrieb Lennart Poettering:
It is our job to shutdown all services cleanly. A number of services
needs this, since they need to bring their
'Twas brillig, and Tom Horsley at 24/01/14 15:44 did gyre and gimble:
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut down cleanly and in the right order.
I didn't ask for any change to any default, I just asked for
users to be able to make
2014/1/24 Colin Guthrie gm...@colin.guthr.ie:
'Twas brillig, and Tom Horsley at 24/01/14 15:44 did gyre and gimble:
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut down cleanly and in the right order.
I didn't ask for any change to any
On Fri, 24.01.14 11:27, Ben Boeckel (maths...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 11:07:18 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 23.01.14 13:54, Ben Boeckel (maths...@gmail.com) wrote:
As I mused on LWN[1] recently, I was wondering whether it was possible
to have user units be
On Fri, 24.01.14 17:10, Colin Guthrie (gm...@colin.guthr.ie) wrote:
'Twas brillig, and Tom Horsley at 24/01/14 15:44 did gyre and gimble:
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut down cleanly and in the right order.
I didn't
On Fri, 24.01.14 18:18, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
2014/1/24 Colin Guthrie gm...@colin.guthr.ie:
'Twas brillig, and Tom Horsley at 24/01/14 15:44 did gyre and gimble:
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut down
Am 24.01.2014 18:43, schrieb Lennart Poettering:
On Fri, 24.01.14 17:10, Colin Guthrie (gm...@colin.guthr.ie) wrote:
'Twas brillig, and Tom Horsley at 24/01/14 15:44 did gyre and gimble:
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut
On Fri, 24.01.14 21:10, Ivan Shapovalov (intelfx...@gmail.com) wrote:
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut down cleanly and in the right order
then bugs like https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023820
I
On Fri, 24.01.14 18:45, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote:
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut down cleanly and in the right order.
I didn't ask for any change to any default, I just asked for
users to be able to
On Fri 24 Jan 2014 11:37:49 Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 23.01.14 11:55, Barry Scott (barry.sc...@onelan.co.uk) wrote:
I am running systemd 208 on Fedora 20.
There are 2 cpu cgroup attributes that I need to set to allow realtime for
some daemons: cpu.rt_period_us and
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Fri, 24.01.14 18:45, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote:
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut down cleanly and in the right order.
From: Matthew Monaco matthew.mon...@0x01b.net
logind considers it an error for a seat other than seat0 to have a
non-zero vtnr for CreateSession
---
This is what I've been using for the past 3 weeks.
src/login/pam-module.c | 6 ++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git
2014/1/24 Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net:
On Fri, 24.01.14 18:18, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
Making the shutdown more verbose in such a situation would imho be a
good idea, showing a countdown or something like that with a note for
which service systemd is currently
Am 24.01.2014 19:26, schrieb Michael Biebl:
2014/1/24 Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net:
Yupp, Michal had the same idea, that's why there is the eye-of-sauron
animation in place...
Ah, good to know. That's a start.
I guess my systemd version (v204) is simply too old then?
Is
В Fri, 24 Jan 2014 18:46:06 +0100
Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net пишет:
On Fri, 24.01.14 21:10, Ivan Shapovalov (intelfx...@gmail.com) wrote:
However, something like that can never be the default, we need to give
services the chance to shut down cleanly and in the right
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:02 AM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Thu, 23.01.14 11:27, David Timothy Strauss (da...@davidstrauss.net) wrote:
Has anyone looked at using socketat() for this? It's unclear whether
that syscall actually exists in any supported form; it's
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:26:48PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
2014/1/24 Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net:
On Fri, 24.01.14 18:18, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
Making the shutdown more verbose in such a situation would imho be a
good idea, showing a countdown or
uhm the below is the result of people using reply-all on
lists and the other side filters out duplicates caused by
leading the off-list reply survives if it was faster
Original-Nachricht
Betreff: Re: [systemd-devel] Allow stop jobs to be killed during shutdown
Datum: Fri, 24 Jan
Am 24.01.2014 19:44, schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek:
Is this animation shown irregardless of whether one has booted with
quiet or not?
With quiet the [OK] lines are not shown, so no, it only works
without quiet
one more case why the shiny graphical boot does only harm
in case of
2014/1/24 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:26:48PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
2014/1/24 Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net:
On Fri, 24.01.14 18:18, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
Making the shutdown more verbose in such a situation
В Fri, 24 Jan 2014 19:44:08 +0100
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl пишет:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:26:48PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
2014/1/24 Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net:
On Fri, 24.01.14 18:18, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
Making the
Am 24.01.2014 20:01, schrieb Andrey Borzenkov:
В Fri, 24 Jan 2014 19:44:08 +0100
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl пишет:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:26:48PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
2014/1/24 Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net:
On Fri, 24.01.14 18:18, Michael Biebl
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 24.01.2014 20:01, schrieb Andrey Borzenkov:
В Fri, 24 Jan 2014 19:44:08 +0100
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl пишет:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:26:48PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
2014/1/24 Lennart
Am 29.02.2012 17:16, schrieb Lennart Poettering:
On Sun, 26.02.12 19:13, Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) wrote:
the ExecStop is called but systemd DOES NOT wait
until it is finished leading to all virtual machines
are killed hard while systemctl stop vmware-default.service
does
37 matches
Mail list logo
