On Wed, 16.07.14 20:45, Jon Severinsson (j...@severinsson.net) wrote:
onsdagen den 16 juli 2014 16:49:55 skrev Lennart Poettering:
On Wed, 16.07.14 12:09, Jon Severinsson (j...@severinsson.net) wrote:
From: Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no
If you really want to support systems without
From: Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no
---
rules/99-systemd.rules.in | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/rules/99-systemd.rules.in b/rules/99-systemd.rules.in
index c3ef81b..df83a38 100644
--- a/rules/99-systemd.rules.in
+++ b/rules/99-systemd.rules.in
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
# (at your
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Jon Severinsson j...@severinsson.net wrote:
From: Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no
---
rules/99-systemd.rules.in | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
The file should not do any harm. If it does, we should check if
something needs to be fixed in a different
Jon Severinsson [2014-07-16 12:09 +0200]:
ACTION==remove, GOTO=systemd_end
+TEST!=/run/systemd/system, GOTO=systemd_end
I'm fairly sure that this is obsolete. Can you please test without
this?
Martin
--
Martin Pitt| http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer
onsdagen den 16 juli 2014 16:49:55 skrev Lennart Poettering:
On Wed, 16.07.14 12:09, Jon Severinsson (j...@severinsson.net) wrote:
From: Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no
If you really want to support systems without systemd installed, then I'd
recommend placing this rules file in the systemd
在 2014年7月16日 星期三 20:45:56，Jon Severinsson 写道：
The file still contains one RUN+=@rootlibexecdir@/systemd-sysctl ...,
which I don't think is desirable when systemd is installed but not running
as PID 1 (which we also have to support).
support for the sake of support is a bad syndrom.
