On 04/09/14 01:58, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 03.09.14 22:16, Juho Son (juho80@samsung.com) wrote:
systemd-journald check the cgroup id to support rate limit option for
every messages. so journald should be available to access cgroup node in
each process send messages to journald.
systemd-journald check the cgroup id to support rate limit option for
every messages. so journald should be available to access cgroup node in
each process send messages to journald.
In system using SMACK, cgroup node in proc is assigned execute label
as each process's execute label.
so if
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 12:44 +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
Hi
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Tanu Kaskinen
tanu.kaski...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 11:47 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 14:00 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 26.08.14 12:17,
(I will happy there is already similar method already exist.)
systemd already has similar functionality systemd-run but that is only
for scope or service unit. I think that is useful run a service without
unit file on permanent storage.
As a similar method, is it possible to generate or
Hi, I'm looking at creating a runtime/app thing for Gnome in the style
of:
http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html
However, I noticed that some core dependencies like mesa uses libudev.
And in fact, needs user-set additional info not in sysfs. In particular,
it
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 at 01:40:51, Ivan Shapovalov wrote:
---
The patch by Umut did miss at least hybrid-sleep -- it involves hibernation
as well (hybrid sleep is a hibernation followed by S3 rather than S4
powerdown).
Also, it messed up indentation a bit (Makefile.am seems
Chris Morgan wrote on 11/09/14 02:32:
On Sep 10, 2014 5:46 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
zbys...@in.waw.pl mailto:zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 07:39:17PM -0400, Chris Morgan wrote:
Specifically, running `systemd --user` directly is not supported
anymore. The
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 5:03 AM, Colin Guthrie gm...@colin.guthr.ie wrote:
Chris Morgan wrote on 11/09/14 02:32:
On Sep 10, 2014 5:46 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
zbys...@in.waw.pl mailto:zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 07:39:17PM -0400, Chris Morgan wrote:
This extends the udev parser to support OP_REMOVE (-=) and adds support
for TAG-= to remove previously set tags. We don't fail if the tag didn't
exist.
This is pretty handy if we ship default rules for seat-assignments and
users want to exclude specific devices from that. They can easily add
Hi
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Tanu Kaskinen
tanu.kaski...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 12:44 +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
Hi
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Tanu Kaskinen
tanu.kaski...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 11:47 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
2014-09-11 13:28 GMT+02:00 David Herrmann dh.herrm...@gmail.com:
This patch is untested! Comments welcome.
Should probably be documented in man udev(7) as well.
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?
Hi
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Michael Biebl mbi...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-09-11 13:28 GMT+02:00 David Herrmann dh.herrm...@gmail.com:
This patch is untested! Comments welcome.
Should probably be documented in man udev(7) as well.
Indeed, now fixed.
Thanks
David
Hi
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:28 PM, David Herrmann dh.herrm...@gmail.com wrote:
This extends the udev parser to support OP_REMOVE (-=) and adds support
for TAG-= to remove previously set tags. We don't fail if the tag didn't
exist.
This is pretty handy if we ship default rules for
Hi
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:20 AM, philippedesw...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
m-kdbus could be freed before it is released. Changing the
order fixes the issue.
Found with Coverity. Fixes: CID#1237798
Signed-off-by: Philippe De Swert
Hi
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:20 AM, philippedesw...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
In case set_consume goes wrong, the pattern name has already been
freed. So we do not try to print it in the logs, assuming the pattern
addition print will be printed just
Hi
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:20 AM, philippedesw...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
When num is 0 we jump to the error handling. However at that time
r is not set yet by keyboard_fill so we most likely get a nonsensical
error. However the num check is
Hi
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:20 AM, philippedesw...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
After a section of memory is succesfully allocated, some of the following
actions can still fail due to lack of memory. In this case -ENOMEM is
returned without actually
Hi
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:20 AM, philippedesw...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
Actually unref the buscreds when we are not going to return a
pointer to them. As when bus_creds_add_more fails we immediately
return the error code otherwise and leak the
Hi
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:14 PM, philippedesw...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
In test_read_one_char the filehandle does not get its fclose
at the end of the function, thus we are leaking fd's.
Found with Coverity. Fixes: CID#1237749
Signed-off-by:
Hi
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:14 PM, philippedesw...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
Found with Coverity.
Signed-off-by: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
Looks good, applied!
Thanks
David
---
src/activate/activate.c | 2 +-
1 file changed,
Hi
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:14 PM, philippedesw...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
Found with Coverity. Fixes: CID#996435
Signed-off-by: Philippe De Swert philippedesw...@gmail.com
---
src/journal/journal-send.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+),
Hi
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:45 AM, WaLyong Cho walyong@samsung.com wrote:
(I will happy there is already similar method already exist.)
systemd already has similar functionality systemd-run but that is only
for scope or service unit. I think that is useful run a service without
unit
Dale R. Worley wrote on 10/09/14 20:56:
From: Mantas Mikulėnas graw...@gmail.com
What I was thinking of is, what is the program that reads (directly or
indirectly) the Store.mount file and from that decides exactly how to
call mount(8), and when to call it?
It's systemd itself (pid 1).
From: Colin Guthrie gm...@colin.guthr.ie
I'm maybe missing something, but in the case of mount units, isn't that
framework program mount(8)?
It has a mechanism for parsing default options that apply to all mounts
and then calling out to the appropriate, filesystem specific mount
program
Hallo,
On 11 September 2014 19:41, Dale R. Worley wor...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
From: Colin Guthrie gm...@colin.guthr.ie
I'm maybe missing something, but in the case of mount units, isn't that
framework program mount(8)?
It has a mechanism for parsing default options that apply to all
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Mon, 11.08.14 18:39, Luis R. Rodriguez (mcg...@suse.com) wrote:
This looks really wrong. We shouldn't permit worker processes to be
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net wrote:
On Mon, 11.08.14 18:39, Luis R. Rodriguez (mcg...@suse.com) wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
mcg...@do-not-panic.com wrote:
More than two years
have gone by on growing design and assumptions on top of that original
commit. I'm not sure if *systemd folks* yet believe its was a design
regression?
I don't think so. udev should not
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Lennart Poettering
lenn...@poettering.net
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:10 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
mcg...@do-not-panic.com wrote:
More than two years
have gone by on growing design and assumptions on top of that original
commit. I'm not sure if *systemd folks* yet believe
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:50:19PM +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez mcg...@suse.com wrote:
and added a warning
which is triggered after a third of the timeout.
This is great! What commit merged this?I just looked at the latest
commits and
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:26 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez
mcg...@do-not-panic.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote:
How about simply introducing a new flag to finit_module() to indicate
that the caller does not care about asynchronicity. We could then pass
32 matches
Mail list logo
