Le mardi 24 août 2010 à 16:38 -0400, Bill Nottingham a écrit :
> Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) said:
> > > PACKAGING
> > > - Guidelines for packaging systemd units shall be formalized.
> >
> > As pointed out elsewhere, I'd avoid this for F14.
>
> Then we should put "don't" in the gu
On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 09:49 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Matt McCutchen wrote:
> > I think that's precisely the concern. In the event that F14 goes back
> > to upstart, the final release will use a configuration that may not have
> > received much testing.
>
> Don't Do That Then. :-) It's just an
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 15:35 +0200, drago01 wrote:
>
>> Indeed, imo we should add them to the release criteria.
>
> It's a rather indigestible lump, for the criteria. James and I were
> thinking about a 'module' system for the release criter
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 03:27:54PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> chkconfig is different, because it's not a 1:1 mapping, and there are
> different semantics involved. I'd like to have it working so that the
> automated uses in scripts/frameworks work (checking whether a service is
> enabled, for
Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) said:
> Hmm, so this is about files that are deleted but still mapped by init,
> and which can only be deleted when init stops referencing them, but that
> is required to remount the fs r/o? Did I get this right?
Correct.
> I am not really convinced tha
Chris Adams (cmad...@hiwaay.net) said:
> > > This is a very big change. chkconfig has worked for a long, long time. Its
> > > elegance and simplicity is one of the nice administrative features of Red
> > > Hat based distributes. People like it.
> >
> > Yes, and they should continue to use it -- f
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:32PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> backwards compatibility. THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY VERBOSE. Comments, changes,
> etc. welcome.
We need something in here about cgroups. Doing something useful by default
with cgroups is one of the big selling points for systemd. We
On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 15:35 +0200, drago01 wrote:
> Indeed, imo we should add them to the release criteria.
It's a rather indigestible lump, for the criteria. James and I were
thinking about a 'module' system for the release criteria so it can link
out to other pages, but I'm wondering when a dil
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 04:08:49PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 25.08.10 03:03, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote:
> > The traditional solution is to reexec not on shutdown, but immediately
> > after init upgrade (which also frees the inodes early); this can still
> > race with shu
On Wed, 25.08.10 03:03, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote:
> > > > > If the libraries or binaries used by systemd are replaced during
> > > > > runtime,
> > > > > and it is not re-executed on shutdown, the filesystem will have busy
> > > > > inodes
> > > > > on shutdown. (If you'd like to tak
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 23:31 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>
>> > I'm going to be blunt. I DON'T CARE.
>>
>> Yay, thanks that you don't care. You are aware that by putting
>> everything on a single man's shoulders and then telling him "yo
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 23:31 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > I'm going to be blunt. I DON'T CARE.
>
> Yay, thanks that you don't care. You are aware that by putting
> everything on a single man's shoulders and then telling him "you don't
> care" you make him feel really welcome and make him w
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 02:05:01PM +0200, Jan Safranek wrote:
> > bug number?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626794
thanks.
--
Matthew Miller
Senior Systems Architect -- Instructional & Research Computing Services
Harvard School of Engineering & Applied Sciences
--
devel mailing
On 08/25/2010 01:59 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 12:58:26PM +0200, Jan Safranek wrote:
>> It should also mount nothing else unless it is absolutely necessary for
>> systemd! Currently systemd mounts all control groups controllers
>> (/cgroup/cpu, /cgroup/cpuset, /cgroup/cpuac
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 12:58:26PM +0200, Jan Safranek wrote:
> It should also mount nothing else unless it is absolutely necessary for
> systemd! Currently systemd mounts all control groups controllers
> (/cgroup/cpu, /cgroup/cpuset, /cgroup/cpuacct, ...), which breaks libcgroup.
bug number?
-
On 08/24/2010 05:06 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> GENERAL SANITY
> - Booting a system shall achieve a similar result as booting in upstart:
> -- The same set of services will be started.
> -- The services shall function the same.
> -- The same set of devices and filesystems shall be mounted.
> -- Th
Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Lennart Poettering (…) said:
[snip]
>> We want prefdm to start as early as possible.
>
> That is a separate discussion that should be had once we have the basic
> functionality verified and working, IMO. If we want to reorganize around
> early login, we should do that as
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> But you enable them to block out change. For example, if somebody
> refuses to merge a patch that adds a systemd equivalent for an upstart
> config hook he has,
… then a provenpackager should just commit the change.
We should trust maintainers in most cases, but if the
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> You can actually use systemd.confirm_spawn=yes on the kernel
> cmdline. This should work fine for an interactive boot and things are
> synchronized via tty ownership. However, I am not sure how useful this
> all is, given that we starte gdm pretty early (which then owns
Matt McCutchen wrote:
> I think that's precisely the concern. In the event that F14 goes back
> to upstart, the final release will use a configuration that may not have
> received much testing.
Don't Do That Then. :-) It's just another reason to stick with systemd.
Kevin Kofler
--
deve
Adam Williamson wrote:
> for clarity - no, there's nothing magic about five releases ago. Five
> was a Random Rhetorical Number. :) I don't know the last time we had a
> major init system change, whenever it was, I wasn't around.
You actually guessed the correct number. Upstart was introduced in F
seth vidal wrote:
> It always worked for me - and it saved my arse a number of times when a
> service starting up would go haywire and hang the system.
Same here, I have used interactive boot more than once to fix a non-booting
system.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fed
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 21:44 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > I think that's precisely the concern. In the event that F14 goes back
> > to upstart, the final release will use a configuration that may not have
> > received much testing. If we want to claim that it's safe to switch
> > back to ups
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 16:29 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 10:23 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 12:14 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> >
> > > > The intent is not to do so in the final release, AIUI. We're only
> > > > keeping it around during pre-release
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/24/2010 03:39 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 24.08.10 09:44, Daniel J Walsh (dwa...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
>> I would add security things.
>>
>> Starting a service sends audit messages from the proper loginuid.
>> I am sure Steve Grub has
Lennart Poettering píše v St 25. 08. 2010 v 02:52 +0200:
> On Tue, 24.08.10 20:14, Matt McCutchen (m...@mattmccutchen.net) wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 23:31 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > On Tue, 24.08.10 16:38, Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > > Lennart Poettering (m
On Tue, 24.08.10 20:14, Matt McCutchen (m...@mattmccutchen.net) wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 23:31 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Tue, 24.08.10 16:38, Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) said:
> > > > > - init shall support a m
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 23:31 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 24.08.10 16:38, Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) said:
> > > > - init shall support a mechanism to re-exec itself to not cause dirty
> > > > inodes on shutdown; initscr
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:32:32PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > This isn't personal. It's a list of requirements that indicate where we need
> > to be in order to ship systemd as the default in Fedora 14. It doesn't
> > matter whose "fault" it is -- if it doesn't work, we can't ship it
> >
On Tue, 24.08.10 16:54, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
> > While I think this is a good idea I am concernced a bit that this makes
> > me responsible for stuff I am not willing to take responsibility
> > of. i.e. if something from this list is broken, but it isn't systemd's
> > fault th
On Tue, 24.08.10 16:38, Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) said:
> > > - init shall support a mechanism to re-exec itself to not cause dirty
> > > inodes on shutdown; initscripts will use this method on shutdown.
> >
> > This is bad. Whil
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 8/24/10 1:46 PM, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 22:32 +0200, drago01 wrote:
>> [...] In the event that F14 goes back
>>> to upstart, the final release will use a configuration that may not have
>>> received much testing. If we want t
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 09:33:50PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > This, however, is just packaging guidelines. From readng the thread,
> > there are many things that I think people would like covered with
> > systemd before they would feel comfortable with it. So, I'm going to
> > attempt to
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 22:32 +0200, drago01 wrote:
> [...] In the event that F14 goes back
> > to upstart, the final release will use a configuration that may not have
> > received much testing. If we want to claim that it's safe to switch
> > back to upstart after beta, we need to be testing that
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:05:57PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > From a practical point of view, I think what's actually important is:
> > -- if you're in single user mode → it says 'S'
> It actually returns "1" in this case.
What do you mean by "actually"? If you try it, you will see th
Lennart Poettering (mzerq...@0pointer.de) said:
> > - init shall support a mechanism to re-exec itself to not cause dirty
> > inodes on shutdown; initscripts will use this method on shutdown.
>
> This is bad. While we support this just fine I think it is a really bad
> idea to reexec init at sh
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 10:23 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 12:14 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
>>
>> > > The intent is not to do so in the final release, AIUI. We're only
>> > > keeping it around during pre-release, so
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 10:23 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 12:14 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
>
> > > The intent is not to do so in the final release, AIUI. We're only
> > > keeping it around during pre-release, so that if we decide we need to
> > > fall back to upstart for fi
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 15:16 -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Lennart Poettering said:
> > On Tue, 24.08.10 15:55, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
> > > This is a very big change. chkconfig has worked for a long, long time. Its
> > > elegance and simplicity is one of the nice
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:15:43PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > Well, also as stated in the bug :), always follow the /etc/inittab first. If
> > if it makes sense, perhaps systemd should change the default.target to
> > match.
> Maybe we should check AUTOEXEC.BAT first, too?
Cute.
The ans
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 14:15, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 24.08.10 16:14, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 01:20:21PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>> > As stated in the bug, this would lead to a situation where you could
>> > have both a initdefau
Once upon a time, Lennart Poettering said:
> On Tue, 24.08.10 15:55, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
> > This is a very big change. chkconfig has worked for a long, long time. Its
> > elegance and simplicity is one of the nice administrative features of Red
> > Hat based distributes. Peo
On Tue, 24.08.10 16:14, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 01:20:21PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > As stated in the bug, this would lead to a situation where you could
> > have both a initdefault line, and a default.target symlnk, that select
> > different
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 01:20:21PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> As stated in the bug, this would lead to a situation where you could
> have both a initdefault line, and a default.target symlnk, that select
> different things. How would you arbitrate?
Well, also as stated in the bug :), always f
On Tue, 24.08.10 15:55, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 09:33:50PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > What would make sense to add to chkconfig is something that checks
> > whether a systemd unit is installed and then prints "Hey, you have a
> > systemd uni
On Tue, 24.08.10 11:47, Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) wrote:
> From a practical point of view, I think what's actually important is:
>
> -- if you're in single user mode → it says 'S'
It actually returns "1" in this case.
> -- if you're in non-GUI multiuser → it says '3'
> -- if you
On Tue, 24.08.10 12:14, Mike McGrath (mmcgr...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 11:15 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 08:45:33AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > > > GENERAL SANITY
> > > > > - Booting a s
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 09:33:50PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> What would make sense to add to chkconfig is something that checks
> whether a systemd unit is installed and then prints "Hey, you have a
> systemd unit installed, chkconfig won't do what you think it will do for
> this unit" or
seth vidal (skvi...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> > I'll test it in rhel6 in just a sec.
>
> Doesn't work in rhel6 :(
If you hold down the key long enough at the right time, it sort of works.
That's not really how we want to have it going forward, for obvious reasons.
Bill
--
devel mailing list
d
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 15:46 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 14:28 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > seth vidal (skvi...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> > > > > You mean 'being passed on the kernel cmdline', I assume ?
> > > > > Do we consider interactive boot essential (I think not) ?
Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) said:
> > The intent is not to do so in the final release, AIUI. We're only
> > keeping it around during pre-release, so that if we decide we need to
> > fall back to upstart for final release, it's easy to do. As far as I
> > know, the plan is to decide later (p
On Tue, 24.08.10 13:28, Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> Matthias Clasen (mcla...@redhat.com) said:
> > > BOOTUP
> > > - System boots successfully to GUI, when configured.
> > > - System boots successfully to text mode, when configured.
> > > - System properly handles being passed
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 14:28 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> seth vidal (skvi...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> > > > You mean 'being passed on the kernel cmdline', I assume ?
> > > > Do we consider interactive boot essential (I think not) ?
> > > > Should mention something about forced fsck, maybe.
>
On Tue, 24.08.10 09:44, Daniel J Walsh (dwa...@redhat.com) wrote:
> I would add security things.
>
> Starting a service sends audit messages from the proper loginuid.
> I am sure Steve Grub has lots of concerns here also.
This is not fair!
Upstart never did this. We do this now in systemd, as t
On Tue, 24.08.10 03:33, Jeff Garzik (jgar...@pobox.com) wrote:
> File /etc/inittab should keep working at the same level it is now.
Yes, let's have this discussion again. It was so much fun!
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http
On Mon, 23.08.10 23:06, Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) wrote:
> (intentionally breaking thread)
>
> Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) said:
> > Maybe I should start a new thread since this isn't really a bug, but it is
> > a blocker -- we need to get some packaging guidelines out for sy
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 15:23 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:11:58AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > If we're still including upstart as a fallback option, I think it's
> > The intent is not to do so in the final release, AIUI. We're only
> > keeping it around during pr
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:11:58AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > If we're still including upstart as a fallback option, I think it's
> The intent is not to do so in the final release, AIUI. We're only
> keeping it around during pre-release, so that if we decide we need to
> fall back to upstart
On 08/24/2010 04:18 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 03:33:59AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> BOOTUP
>>> - System properly handles being passed [1-5], 'single', 'S', 's', '-s',
>>> booting to the appropriate 'runlevel' (0 and 6 can still work,
>>> but they're sort of pointl
seth vidal (skvi...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> > > You mean 'being passed on the kernel cmdline', I assume ?
> > > Do we consider interactive boot essential (I think not) ?
> > > Should mention something about forced fsck, maybe.
> > > What about selinux relabeling ?
> >
> > I can't remember inte
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 01:21:30PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Miroslav Lichvar (mlich...@redhat.com) said:
> > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:32PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > SERVICE HANDLING
> > > - Running 'chkconfig <(null)|on|off>' on a service managed by
> > > systemd
> > > wi
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 23:06 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> This, however, is just packaging guidelines. From readng the thread, there
> are many things that I think people would like covered with systemd before
> they would feel comfortable with it. So, I'm going to attempt to quantify
> what wou
Matthias Clasen (mcla...@redhat.com) said:
> > BOOTUP
> > - System boots successfully to GUI, when configured.
> > - System boots successfully to text mode, when configured.
> > - System properly handles being passed [1-5], 'single', 'S', 's', '-s',
> > booting to the appropriate 'runlevel' (0 a
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 12:14 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > The intent is not to do so in the final release, AIUI. We're only
> > keeping it around during pre-release, so that if we decide we need to
> > fall back to upstart for final release, it's easy to do. As far as I
> > know, the plan is to d
Miroslav Lichvar (mlich...@redhat.com) said:
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:32PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > SERVICE HANDLING
> > - Running 'chkconfig <(null)|on|off>' on a service managed by systemd
> > will return the correct code/perform an appropriate action.
>
> Also, if chkconfig
Matthew Miller (mat...@mattdm.org) said:
> How about:
>
> - If /etc/inittab exists and contains an initdefault line, the default
> target will be set accordingly.
> - any other non-comment, non-blank lines in /etc/inittab will be logged as
> warnings.
>
> This leaves a migration path (ditch
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 11:15 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 08:45:33AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > > GENERAL SANITY
> > > > - Booting a system shall achieve a similar result as booting in upstart:
> > > > -- The same se
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 11:15 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 08:45:33AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > GENERAL SANITY
> > > - Booting a system shall achieve a similar result as booting in upstart:
> > > -- The same set of services will be started.
> >
> > I don't think t
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:32PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> SERVICE HANDLING
> - Running 'chkconfig <(null)|on|off>' on a service managed by systemd
> will return the correct code/perform an appropriate action.
> - Running 'service ' on a service managed by systemd
> will perform the a
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:32PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> RUNTIME TOOLS
> - telinit [0123456] does the proper thing.
It currently doesn't, by the way. But there's been upstream fixes which
aren't yet in rawhide, so I'll retest when that's available.
> - the 'runlevel' command displays co
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 08:45:33AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > GENERAL SANITY
> > - Booting a system shall achieve a similar result as booting in upstart:
> > -- The same set of services will be started.
>
> I don't think this is a requirement on systemd, really. If we make
> changes to the
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:18:27AM +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> > File /etc/inittab should keep working at the same level it is now.
> Now it only selects default runlevel.
How about:
- If /etc/inittab exists and contains an initdefault line, the default
target will be set accordingly.
- any
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:00:55AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> I can't remember interactive boot ever working.
It does in RHEL 5. It will need to be working for RHEL 7.
--
Matthew Miller
Senior Systems Architect -- Instructional & Research Computing Services
Harvard School of Engineering & Appl
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 10:00 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 08:45 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 23:06 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > BOOTUP
> > > - System boots successfully to GUI, when configured.
> > > - System boots successfully to text mode, wh
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 08:45 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 23:06 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > BOOTUP
> > - System boots successfully to GUI, when configured.
> > - System boots successfully to text mode, when configured.
> > - System properly handles being passed [1-5],
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/24/2010 08:45 AM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 23:06 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
> Hey Bill,
>
> this is a very good initial list, this should make it very easy for QA
> to whip up a test plan for systemd. Some comments be
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 23:06 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Hey Bill,
this is a very good initial list, this should make it very easy for QA
to whip up a test plan for systemd. Some comments below.
> BOOTUP
> - System boots successfully to GUI, when configured.
> - System boots successfully to te
2010/8/24 Miroslav Lichvar :
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:32PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>> SERVICE HANDLING
>> - Running 'chkconfig <(null)|on|off>' on a service managed by systemd
>> will return the correct code/perform an appropriate action.
>
> Also, if chkconfig --add called "systemc
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:32PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> SERVICE HANDLING
> - Running 'chkconfig <(null)|on|off>' on a service managed by systemd
> will return the correct code/perform an appropriate action.
Also, if chkconfig --add called "systemctl enable" when the sysv
script is en
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 03:33:59AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > BOOTUP
> > - System properly handles being passed [1-5], 'single', 'S', 's', '-s',
> >booting to the appropriate 'runlevel' (0 and 6 can still work,
> >but they're sort of pointless anyway) When booted in this manner,
> >'
On 08/23/2010 11:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> (intentionally breaking thread)
>
> Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) said:
>> Maybe I should start a new thread since this isn't really a bug, but it is
>> a blocker -- we need to get some packaging guidelines out for systemd.
>> I think that the
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:06:32PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> This, however, is just packaging guidelines. From readng the thread, there
> are many things that I think people would like covered with systemd before
> they would feel comfortable with it. So, I'm going to attempt to quantify
> wh
(intentionally breaking thread)
Toshio Kuratomi (a.bad...@gmail.com) said:
> Maybe I should start a new thread since this isn't really a bug, but it is
> a blocker -- we need to get some packaging guidelines out for systemd.
> I think that the last message on the subject was this one:
>
> http:/
83 matches
Mail list logo
