Re: [systemd-devel] negative trust anchors not working with non TLD domain names

On 04/20/2017 07:05 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Wed, 19.04.17 07:12, Sean Dague (s...@dague.net) wrote: > >> I just upgraded to Ubuntu 17.04 (systemd 232) where systemd-resolved is >> turned on by default, which means DNSSEC validation on by default. > > The DNSSEC code got substantially

Re: [systemd-devel] sd-bus: ObjectManager difference with gdbus

Hey On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:06 PM, David Härdeman wrote: > Hi, > > I'm implementing a server which creates an ObjectManager using the > sd-bus API and there seems to be some differences between how gdbus and > sd-bus implements the API. > > I implemented a simple

Re: [systemd-devel] nspawn: devpts not mounted with PrivateUsers

2017-04-20 13:09 GMT+02:00 Michael Biebl : > nspawn/machined are in the systemd-container package in Debian, which > in turn recommends libnss-mymachines. > Recommends are installed by default, unless the user explicitly disables that. And libnss-mymachines depends on

Re: [systemd-devel] nspawn: devpts not mounted with PrivateUsers

2017-04-20 12:32 GMT+02:00 Lennart Poettering : > On Thu, 20.04.17 00:14, Olaf the Lost Viking (olaf.the.lost.vik...@gmail.com) > wrote: > >> > Don't do this. If you register the group like this, nspawn will >> > normally abstain from using this group. Use "nss-mymachines"

Re: [systemd-devel] negative trust anchors not working with non TLD domain names

On Wed, 19.04.17 07:12, Sean Dague (s...@dague.net) wrote: > I just upgraded to Ubuntu 17.04 (systemd 232) where systemd-resolved is > turned on by default, which means DNSSEC validation on by default. The DNSSEC code got substantially updated in 233. Any chance you can retest with something

Re: [systemd-devel] nspawn: devpts not mounted with PrivateUsers

On Thu, 20.04.17 00:14, Olaf the Lost Viking (olaf.the.lost.vik...@gmail.com) wrote: > > Don't do this. If you register the group like this, nspawn will > > normally abstain from using this group. Use "nss-mymachines" instead > > (consider lobbying your distro to turn it on automatically when >

[systemd-devel] sd-bus: ObjectManager difference with gdbus

Hi, I'm implementing a server which creates an ObjectManager using the sd-bus API and there seems to be some differences between how gdbus and sd-bus implements the API. I implemented a simple ObjectManager at /org/gnome/TestManager which exports objects /org/gnome/TestManager/fooX with

Re: [systemd-devel] Service Type for Tomcat

On Wed, 19.04.17 20:32, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote: > 18.04.2017 21:35, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard пишет: > > "Igal @ Lucee.org" : > >> Examples I see online use forking [...] > > > > ... because they are bad examples. Read > >

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd mucking with partition tables ( was: bug#25756: Problems using "parted ... print" on nvme devices )

On Wed, 19.04.17 13:59, Phil Susi (ps...@ubuntu.com) wrote: > On 4/19/2017 12:17 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > This isn't precisely new functionality, it has been doing that since > > years. It will synthesize "change" udev events when a process closes a block > > device after writing, so

Re: [systemd-devel] logging API

The logging API provided by journald is already very rich, have a look at man:sd_journal_send if you just want log levels, do note that journald will parse lines starting with "<1>" and related prefix as syslog levels and correctly treat them... even if those messages arrive through the

[systemd-devel] logging API

Hello. I am writing a new piece of code. After several dozens of fprintf(3) calls here and there I decided to clean that mess. I really like the internal logging API (log_error(), log_debug(), log_info_errno() etc.) used by systemd parts. Is it possible to make it part of the public libsystemd