I noticed that when isolating a target that requires a unit.socket, the
unit.service which the socket activates will be stopped. Is this intentional?
I expected the service to be left alone (even in the weaker case that the socket
wasn't already active).
Some parts of systemd (at least the DBus activation codepath) reply
to signals, which of course have the no-reply flag set. We will be
defensive here and still send out a reply if we're passed a signal.
Regression introduced by: c6a818c82035da91e
Reported-by: Mantas Mikulėnas graw...@gmail.com
From: Harald Hoyer har...@redhat.com
When using -p and -b in combination with -u, the output is not
what you would expect. The reason is the sd_journal_add_disjunction()
call in add_matches_for_unit() and add_matches_for_user_unit(), which
adds two ORs without taking the other conditions to every
There are many ways in which we can get those checks wrong,
so it is better to warn and then error out on a real access
failure.
For an unpriviledged user:
[testuser ~]$ journalctl
Showing user generated messages only. Users in the group 'systemd-journal' can
see all messages. Pass -q to turn
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 07:50:43AM -0600, Matthew Monaco wrote:
I noticed that when isolating a target that requires a unit.socket, the
unit.service which the socket activates will be stopped. Is this
intentional?
I expected the service to be left alone (even in the weaker case that the
Sync journal with fdatasync after 10s of inactivity (by default), or
or after 10m of last commit (by default). Intervals configured via
SyncIntervalIdleSec and SyncIntervalMaxSec options at journal.conf.
Manual sync can be performed via sending SIGUSR1.
---
src/journal/journal-file.c | 29
On Fri, 22.03.13 22:49, Oleksii Shevchuk (alx...@gmail.com) wrote:
Sync journal with fdatasync after 10s of inactivity (by default), or
or after 10m of last commit (by default). Intervals configured via
SyncIntervalIdleSec and SyncIntervalMaxSec options at journal.conf.
Manual sync can be
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Holger Winkelmann [TP]
h...@travelping.com wrote:
You are right, hopefully systemd will not turn into a direction
where only the ulra modern notebook or desktop can use it.
we see a lot of advantages to use systemd in embedded environments.
and we are talking
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Kok, Auke-jan H
auke-jan.h@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
Am 18.03.2013 19:45, schrieb Kay Sievers:
I put an SSD in that crappy box today; it's down from 25 to 7 sec on
the otherwise
Readahead has all sorts of bad side effects depending on your
storage media. On rotating disks, it may be degrading startup
performance if enough requests are queued spanning linearly
over all blocks early at boot, and mount, blkid and friends
want to insert reads to the start of these block
On Thu, 21.03.13 17:32, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
Hi all,
on https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809820 we noted loopback
mountpoint could failed if systemd was trying to mount them before
systemd-udevd was started, since some static devices node wouldn't be
created
On Thu, 21.03.13 17:04, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
Hi all,
in https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809646 we noticed LSB
Provides can sometime be incorrectly handled (resulting in Failed to
add LSB Provides name .service, ignoring: File exists errors),
depending
On Wed, 20.03.13 14:54, William Douglas (william.doug...@intel.com) wrote:
BUILD_ID is a generic field that can uniquely identify all a
distributions default packages in a release or image build
when VERSION is used as broader identifier.
Hmm, why wouldn't VERSION_ID= be enough for this
On Tue, 19.03.13 21:34, Auke Kok (auke-jan.h@intel.com) wrote:
Without this patch, I'm seeing cgroup paths for user sessions with
both the user name, and the uid created, which can't be intended.
Spotted through user-session-units use.
Hmm, I am missing something here: where do we
On Tue, 19.03.13 17:36, Ludwig Nussel (ludwig.nus...@suse.de) wrote:
useful to get ACLs on files, sockets etc not known to udev
Can't say I like this one. Sounds like an awful lot of code to me to
support evil closed source drivers.
Kay, what do you say?
If we could find a simpler way (for
On Tue, 19.03.13 11:55, Mathieu Cassard (cassard.math...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hello,
I'm a quit new user of systemd. Hope this is the right place to ask
for help...
I am trying to mount an encrypted disk at boot.
I am working with a customized distribution kernel (using ptxdist).
In my
Distributions that never shipped upstart do not have
telinit in /lib/upstart/..
Defaults to /lib/upstart/telinit so there is no change
for systems existing installs.
---
configure.ac | 10 ++
src/systemctl/systemctl.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
2013/3/23 Cristian Rodríguez crrodrig...@opensuse.org
Distributions that never shipped upstart do not have
telinit in /lib/upstart/..
What's the point of this patch? Why would I want to configure the patch to
telinit?
Michael
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent
On Fri, 22.03.13 15:51, har...@redhat.com (har...@redhat.com) wrote:
From: Harald Hoyer har...@redhat.com
When using -p and -b in combination with -u, the output is not
what you would expect. The reason is the sd_journal_add_disjunction()
call in add_matches_for_unit() and
El vie 22 mar 2013 21:27:16 CLST, Michael Biebl escribió:
2013/3/23 Cristian Rodríguez crrodrig...@opensuse.org
mailto:crrodrig...@opensuse.org
Distributions that never shipped upstart do not have
telinit in /lib/upstart/..
What's the point of this patch? Why would I want to configure
On Fri, 22.03.13 21:04, Cristian Rodríguez (crrodrig...@opensuse.org) wrote:
Distributions that never shipped upstart do not have
telinit in /lib/upstart/..
Defaults to /lib/upstart/telinit so there is no change
for systems existing installs.
Applied.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red
On Mon, 18.03.13 09:49, Britton Kerin (britton.ke...@gmail.com) wrote:
Hi everyone, I just had my first encounter with systemd and all in all I'm
highly impressed.
One thing saddened me a bit though: its not obvious what to do if I just want
to start a service or do something *after* all
On Fri, 22.03.13 15:22, Auke Kok (auke-jan.h@intel.com) wrote:
Heya,
Hmm, it would be interesting to know how much data we actually read at
boot. This information should actually be easy to determine, since we
run mincore() anyway... With that information, and a rough idea how fast
harddisks
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 05:13:37PM -0700, Lennart Poettering wrote:
src/journal/journalctl.c | 42 ++
src/journal/sd-journal.c | 30 +++---
2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
New commits:
commit
On Sun, 17.03.13 00:10, Cedric BAIL (cedric.b...@free.fr) wrote:
Hello,
I am currently working on improving Enlightenment integration with
Systemd. So far, I have done the easiest thing, socket activation in
our network library with just one flag and notification when the main
loop is
On Thu, 14.03.13 14:58, Umut Tezduyar (u...@tezduyar.com) wrote:
Hmm, do we really want this configurable? I mean, it's a debug shell,
not more...
Generally we have been very conservative with making too many things
configurable here at build-time, since we don't actually want to
encourage
On Thu, 14.03.13 13:15, har...@redhat.com (har...@redhat.com) wrote:
From: Harald Hoyer har...@redhat.com
Mount units with x-rootfs.mount are now ordered before root-fs.target.
As we sometimes construct /sysroot mounts in /etc/fstab in the initrd,
we want these to be mounted before the
On Wed, 13.03.13 10:27, Umut Tezduyar (u...@tezduyar.com) wrote:
No need to try to stop systemd-sysctl on shutdown as
this service doesn't have ExecStop= anyways.
It's kinda nice if all services are gone from the service list when we
shut down, and doing this costs pretty much nothing.
Also,
On Wed, 13.03.13 01:44, Michal Schmidt (mschm...@redhat.com) wrote:
Attempt to satisfy requirement dependencies retroactively even if
the unexpectedly activated unit would prefer to be started After them.
This way remote-fs-pre.target can be pulled in by performing a manual
mount (the mount
On Wed, 13.03.13 01:44, Michal Schmidt (mschm...@redhat.com) wrote:
Activating Requisite units goes against the reason of existence of this
dependency type.
---
src/core/unit.c | 4
1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/core/unit.c b/src/core/unit.c
index d1f109d..25109ce
On Mon, 11.03.13 17:45, Daniel J Walsh (dwa...@redhat.com) wrote:
LVM is probably invoked from the fedora units for it. You might be able to
mask them. Or you might be able to convince the LVM folks to conditionalize
them somehow, for example via ConditionVirtualization=!container or
On Fri, 08.03.13 14:38, Umut Tezduyar (u...@tezduyar.com) wrote:
Hi,
I have realized that return of systemctl isolate target command is only
synchronous for starting jobs but not for stopping jobs. How can
one
Well, it is synchronous to jobs that are ordered against the unit you
isolate,
On Fri, 08.03.13 14:12, Umut Tezduyar (u...@tezduyar.com) wrote:
Hi,
What would be the advantage of placing an early boot up script in between
local-fs.target/sysinit.target OR in between
sysinit.target/basic.target?
That's a very good question. This hopefully gives a bit of an
Modules might or will register new sysctl options.
diff --git a/units/systemd-sysctl.service.in b/units/systemd-sysctl.service.in
index d914553..bf47097 100644
--- a/units/systemd-sysctl.service.in
+++ b/units/systemd-sysctl.service.in
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ Description=Apply Kernel Variables
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 03:11:41AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 13.03.13 10:27, Umut Tezduyar (u...@tezduyar.com) wrote:
No need to try to stop systemd-sysctl on shutdown as
this service doesn't have ExecStop= anyways.
It's kinda nice if all services are gone from the service
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 04:05:39AM +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 03:11:41AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 13.03.13 10:27, Umut Tezduyar (u...@tezduyar.com) wrote:
No need to try to stop systemd-sysctl on shutdown as
this service doesn't
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
Hmm, it would be interesting to know how much data we actually read at
boot. This information should actually be easy to determine, since we
run mincore() anyway... With that information, and a rough idea how fast
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Tue, 19.03.13 21:34, Auke Kok (auke-jan.h@intel.com) wrote:
Without this patch, I'm seeing cgroup paths for user sessions with
both the user name, and the uid created, which can't be intended.
Spotted
On Sat, 23.03.13 03:54, Cristian Rodríguez (crrodrig...@opensuse.org) wrote:
Modules might or will register new sysctl options.
Well, most modules are loaded asynchronously from udev, so I fear this
won't do much...
/etc/sysctl.d/ is really only for sysctl settings that exist all the
time, and
On Fri, 22.03.13 20:24, Kok, Auke-jan H (auke-jan.h@intel.com) wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Tue, 19.03.13 21:34, Auke Kok (auke-jan.h@intel.com) wrote:
Without this patch, I'm seeing cgroup paths for user sessions
On Mon, 18.03.13 11:39, Simon McVittie (simon.mcvit...@collabora.co.uk) wrote:
On 16/03/13 15:10, Cedric BAIL wrote:
I think I am a little bit late about integrating systemd user
session in a desktop
Not really; as far as I can see, non-trivial systemd user sessions under
X11 need
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Fri, 22.03.13 20:24, Kok, Auke-jan H (auke-jan.h@intel.com) wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Tue, 19.03.13 21:34, Auke Kok
Am 23.03.2013 03:05, schrieb Lennart Poettering:
On Thu, 14.03.13 13:15, har...@redhat.com (har...@redhat.com) wrote:
From: Harald Hoyer har...@redhat.com
Mount units with x-rootfs.mount are now ordered before root-fs.target.
As we sometimes construct /sysroot mounts in /etc/fstab in the
43 matches
Mail list logo
