Quoting Lennart Poettering <mzerq...@0pointer.de>:

On Tue, 02.07.13 16:57, Jean-Marc Pigeon (j...@safe.ca) wrote:

As expected the problem stand on a very small detail (within /etc/fstab)




Note that in a systemd world fstab shouldn't really list any of the
virtual file systems like procfs, sysfs, devpts, /dev/shm, unless you
have specific mount options that need to override the defaults. Also,
the root file system doesn't need to be listed. It is hence a good idea
to leave fstab out entirely if you run things in a container.

I beg to disagree, As I want to keep the container as close as to a
pristine installed distribution and as /etc/fstab is part of it once
installed,
fstab must be present in the container.


The fact that the line just below says, "Please see journal" but
journal is not available (empty) just compound the effect.

How did you access the journal? The journal is actually available pretty
much all the time. It logs to /run as long as /var is not there, to make
this work (very much unlike classic syslog, btw).
Just reporting observation. there is condition where you have
""Please see journal" but journal is empty.


So, no, sorry, systemd doesn't grade "production level" (not yet? or
never?).

Well, as mentioned you altered the most low-level parts of the unit dep
tree. So yeah, a setup like that certainly is not "production level",
but that's hardly our fault.

This issue already covered in previous email,

May I propose some way to improve it.
- journal should be accessible regardless of systemd status or
trouble.

It is. journalctl directly accesses all journal files and starts very
early in the boot process, including in initrd (hint: this is *much*
earlier than classic syslog). And for the time even before the journal
is around, we log to kmsg (i.e. demsg).

- You should have a way to proceed in a 'step by step' boot mode
   (avoiding in parallel fast scrolling report)

systemd.confirm_spawn=yes
Didn't notice this. not sure is what I think we need. need to check.

But disabling the parallelization doesn't really work. If a service foo
triggers starting of a service bar while it is starting up, and needs an
answer from bar before it can proceed, how do you want to ever solve
this? You need to start both foo and bar at the same time.

You need a step by step to sort out problem, instead to flush all data
on the console, this give time to sysadmin to see what is happening
(very good when problem is ocuuring very early in the process)
In step by step I would LOCK in such situation as
"bar need foo AND foo need bar", seems to me a deadly embrace situation
definition, and prone to "timing issue" subtle problem. Systemd should
detect such situation an complain about it.
STEP by STEP mode is obviously a debug mode.

- On a more philosophical side:
   * linking PID1 and systemd seems to me a problem (why it is
mandatory still escape me),

systemd is an init system. init systems run as PID 1. This how Unix
works.
Yes and I agree, But according my understanding of systemd, many
function done by systemd do not need to be PID1. In fact
complexity and smart action could be moved away from PID1 process
keeping PID1 part, lean and simple.
Such way, you could start systemd "smart and interesting" part from
a shell script (which open a lot flexibility an robustness).

Bug:
- After a very quick check, there is maybe a bug the way systemd is
handling 'int reboot(int cmd);',
   I have the strong feeling systemd is not feeding WTERMSIG(status),
but it is very
   preliminary, I could be wrong....

Hmm? I cannot parse this.
OK...
when within the container a reboot is issued by admin, there is a way
to advise
container superviser (the process above systemd), this is done
by reporting a signal status. 'plain init' and 'upstart' are doing that
properly, seems to me systemd is not doing it...
I didn't double check this, very prelimary report.
(hoping this time you can parse my explaination).

Many Thanks Lennart.

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

--
A bientôt
===========================================================
Jean-Marc Pigeon                        E-Mail: j...@safe.ca
SAFE Inc.                             Phone: (514) 493-4280
  Clement, 'a kiss solution' to get rid of SPAM (at last)
     Clement' Home base <"http://www.clement.safe.ca";>
===========================================================

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to