On 03/29/2015 08:46 PM, Alexander Sverdlin wrote:
Entropy Graph code doesn't handle the error condition if open() of /proc entry
fails. Moreover, the file is only opened once and only first sample will
contain
the correct value because the return value of pread() is also not handled
properly
On 03/29/2015 08:44 PM, Alexander Sverdlin wrote:
Correctly handle the potential failure of fdopen() (because of OOM, for
instance)
after potentially successful open(). Prevent leaking open fd in such case.
Applied, thanks!
---
src/bootchart/store.c | 12 ++--
src/bootchart/svg.c
As I understand, the systemd-run utility returns immediately even with
--service-type=forking. What is the proper way then to wait using a shell
until the main service process forks the child and exists signaling
initialization?
___
systemd-devel mailing
I like this. +1
On 26 March 2015 at 15:09, Jan Janssen medhe...@web.de wrote:
---
man/systemctl.xml | 6 +++-
src/libsystemd/sd-bus/bus-common-errors.h | 1 +
src/login/logind-dbus.c | 49 +++--
On Mon, 30.03.15 00:00, Jan Engelhardt (jeng...@inai.de) wrote:
systemd/configure.ac has a
AC_CHECK_PROG([KMOD]...)
but what actually *uses* this? The way it looks, it's all (udev rules)
using libkmod directly.
Let me git grep kmod that for you:
src/core/kmod-setup.c
Heyja
Should this not be dropped and *DE write,integrate/implement an
graphical frontend to systemd for themselves?
It's not like this is receiving the love it needs, hence I'm pretty sure
nobody is using this.
JBG
___
systemd-devel mailing list
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 7:56 PM, WaLyong Cho walyong@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, it seems not. When I added MemoryLimit= option to just one service,
cgroups for every unit were generated on memory cgroup.
It looks like memory_limit and cpu_quota_per_sec_usec both have this
potential issue. The
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 09:15:52PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
This series adds support for detecting if an arm or aarch64
deployment is a Xen or QEMU/KVM guest. I've tested the QEMU/KVM
detection on an AArch64 guest. The Xen detection has *not* been
tested, thus the RFT.
I should not that the
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
johan...@gmail.com wrote:
Heyja
Should this not be dropped and *DE write,integrate/implement an graphical
frontend to systemd for themselves?
It's not like this is receiving the love it needs, hence I'm pretty sure
nobody is using this.
Hi,
My system appears healthy, but for some reason systemd not in a good state.
From the commands and their output, I have two concerns.
1) why is the state starting and not finished?
2) what are these jobs that are running?
This happens to be four luks partitions that go into a btrfs
On 03/30/2015 10:32 PM, Shawn Landden wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
johan...@gmail.com wrote:
Heyja
Should this not be dropped and *DE write,integrate/implement an graphical
frontend to systemd for themselves?
It's not like this is receiving the love it
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Djalal Harouni tix...@opendz.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 09:51:26AM -0700, Shawn Landden wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote:
[...]
* Current expression may modify/interact with a global state which may
cause a
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 09:51:26AM -0700, Shawn Landden wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote:
[...]
* Current expression may modify/interact with a global state which may
cause a fatal error, and if the caller wants to know if that failed,
then
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
johan...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/30/2015 10:32 PM, Shawn Landden wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
johan...@gmail.com wrote:
Heyja
Should this not be dropped and *DE write,integrate/implement an graphical
replaces log with assert() to remove strings.
saves 3kB from text section of systemd.
---
src/shared/macro.h | 16 ++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/shared/macro.h b/src/shared/macro.h
index 7f89951..8cbff01 100644
--- a/src/shared/macro.h
+++
2015-03-27 22:58 GMT+01:00 Michael Biebl mbi...@gmail.com:
After moving away all ~ files:
# journalctl --list-boots | wc -l
100
# journalctl -F _BOOT_ID | wc -l
104
It also scares me a bit, that journald is so prone to create those ~
files that often. My system is not particularly
В Mon, 30 Mar 2015 19:35:21 -0400
kenneth topp to...@bllue.org пишет:
Hi,
My system appears healthy, but for some reason systemd not in a good state.
From the commands and their output, I have two concerns.
1) why is the state starting and not finished?
2) what are these jobs that are
В Mon, 30 Mar 2015 09:48:25 +0200
Igor Bukanov i...@mir2.org пишет:
As I understand, the systemd-run utility returns immediately even with
--service-type=forking. What is the proper way then to wait using a shell
until the main service process forks the child and exists signaling
It would be really nice to have an utility that waits until a unit is
transitioned from the activating state. My problem is that I wanted to
replace in a shell script a sequence like:
sudo -u some_user ssh -f port_forwarding host
use_forwarded_ports
kill hopefully rightly guessed ssh PID
with
В Mon, 30 Mar 2015 19:30:02 -0700
Shawn Landden shawnland...@gmail.com пишет:
What do you feel is missing from systemctl show?
It is only suppose to show fields that have been changed by humans
(even the developer) not systemd defaults.
From its appearance it was supposed to show current
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Andrei Borzenkov arvidj...@gmail.com wrote:
В Mon, 30 Mar 2015 19:30:02 -0700
Shawn Landden shawnland...@gmail.com пишет:
What do you feel is missing from systemctl show?
It is only suppose to show fields that have been changed by humans
(even the
Ð Mon, 30 Mar 2015 19:35:21 -0400
kenneth topp to...@bllue.org пиÑеÑ:
Hi,
My system appears healthy, but for some reason systemd not in a good
state.
From the commands and their output, I have two concerns.
1) why is the state starting and not finished?
2) what are these jobs
On 03/31/2015 05:13 AM, David Timothy Strauss wrote:
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 7:56 PM, WaLyong Cho walyong@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, it seems not. When I added MemoryLimit= option to just one service,
cgroups for every unit were generated on memory cgroup.
It looks like memory_limit and
23 matches
Mail list logo
