Re: [systemd-devel] Breaking ordering cycles... a suggestion.

2012-05-17 Thread Colin Guthrie
'Twas brillig, and Kay Sievers at 17/05/12 15:18 did gyre and gimble: On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Colin Guthrie gm...@colin.guthr.ie wrote: I know this has been discussed a lot but it's still showing up for me on occasion, especially with 3rd party non-LSB init scripts. My suggestion

Re: [systemd-devel] Breaking ordering cycles... a suggestion.

2012-05-17 Thread Michael Biebl
2012/5/17 Kay Sievers k...@vrfy.org: On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Colin Guthrie gm...@colin.guthr.ie wrote: I know this has been discussed a lot but it's still showing up for me on occasion, especially with 3rd party non-LSB init scripts. My suggestion would be to prioritise the jobs that

[systemd-devel] Mount files in systemd

2012-05-17 Thread g4hx
Hello all, I have been using systemd for a while now, and I have to say that I am quite impressed by the noticeable speed up during boot. However, I have some question about systemd that are yet unanswered. I did not find the reuqired information elsewhere, so now I am asking directly: How do I

Re: [systemd-devel] Mount files in systemd

2012-05-17 Thread Tom Gundersen
Hi, On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:54 PM, g4hx g...@gmx.de wrote: How do I include lvm2 based partitions in a technically clean and correct way? The situation is not ideal for lvm on systemd, but enabling lvm.service (from arch-systemd-units) should work for a basic setup where lvm is at the bottom

Re: [systemd-devel] Breaking ordering cycles... a suggestion.

2012-05-17 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
]] Michael Biebl We've seen this quite often on Debian, too, due to sysv init scripts doing interesting stuff, like being both started in rcS.d and rc2.d. This should have been fixed in e51db373c242b7541794affb2b5e411bcce26d0f. More logic to handle non-sensical cases would be good. We should

Re: [systemd-devel] Mount files in systemd

2012-05-17 Thread Tom Gundersen
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 8:28 PM, g4hx g...@gmx.de wrote: On 05/17/2012 08:19 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote: There should be no need to use .mount units, just continue using /etc/fstab as before. Well, I have tried doing that, but if I don't use .mount files with correct dependencies, the device

[systemd-devel] [PATCH] sd-pam: Drop uid so parent signal arrives at child.

2012-05-17 Thread Auke Kok
The PAM helper thread needs to capture the death signal from the parent, but is prohibited from doing so since when the child dies as normal user, the kernel won't allow it to send a TERM to the PAM helper thread which is running as root. This causes the PAM threads to never exit, accumulating