On Mon, 13.04.15 02:37, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
> > Now, of these the first item is a work-around for broken daemons, and
> > this should really be better fixed in the daemons themselves. A daemon
> > that does not require tmpfiles is a good daemon. The third item is
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 07:19:07PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Sun, 12.04.15 14:11, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
>
> > I'm wondering if we should provide better per-user tmpfiles support.
> > For example, if we allowed a set of "user" tmpfiles, which would
> > b
Elias Probst schrieb:
> On 04/12/2015 05:47 PM, Kai Krakow wrote:
>> Elias Probst schrieb:
>>
>>> On 04/12/2015 04:11 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
I'm wondering if we should provide better per-user tmpfiles support.
For example, if we allowed a set of "user" tmpfiles, which
On Sun, 12.04.15 16:46, Elias Probst (m...@eliasprobst.eu) wrote:
> On 04/12/2015 04:11 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > I'm wondering if we should provide better per-user tmpfiles support.
> > For example, if we allowed a set of "user" tmpfiles, which would
> > be executed by the system
On Sun, 12.04.15 14:11, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
> I'm wondering if we should provide better per-user tmpfiles support.
> For example, if we allowed a set of "user" tmpfiles, which would
> be executed by the system instance, but would be considered relative to
> the h
On 04/12/2015 05:47 PM, Kai Krakow wrote:
> Elias Probst schrieb:
>
>> On 04/12/2015 04:11 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>>> I'm wondering if we should provide better per-user tmpfiles support.
>>> For example, if we allowed a set of "user" tmpfiles, which would
>>> be executed by the sy
Elias Probst schrieb:
> On 04/12/2015 04:11 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> I'm wondering if we should provide better per-user tmpfiles support.
>> For example, if we allowed a set of "user" tmpfiles, which would
>> be executed by the system instance, but would be considered relative to
On 04/12/2015 04:11 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> I'm wondering if we should provide better per-user tmpfiles support.
> For example, if we allowed a set of "user" tmpfiles, which would
> be executed by the system instance, but would be considered relative to
> the home directory and XDG
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 03:41:31PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Sat, 11.04.15 16:21, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 02:26:57PM +0200, Kai Krakow wrote:
> > > dean schrieb:
> > >
> > > > Ok thanks for your prompt reply. It is my under
On Sat, 11.04.15 16:21, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 02:26:57PM +0200, Kai Krakow wrote:
> > dean schrieb:
> >
> > > Ok thanks for your prompt reply. It is my understanding the the
> > > house-keeping-plugin "cleans" /tmp so does it need access
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 02:26:57PM +0200, Kai Krakow wrote:
> > dean schrieb:
> >
> > > Ok thanks for your prompt reply. It is my understanding the the
> > > house-keeping-plugin "cleans" /tmp so does it ne
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 02:26:57PM +0200, Kai Krakow wrote:
> dean schrieb:
>
> > Ok thanks for your prompt reply. It is my understanding the the
> > house-keeping-plugin "cleans" /tmp so does it need access?
That sounds wrong. First, systemd is already cleaning /tmp, so nothing
good is going to
dean schrieb:
> Ok thanks for your prompt reply. It is my understanding the the
> house-keeping-plugin "cleans" /tmp so does it need access? Does systemD
> "clean" its own /tmp files/folders?
Yes, it does. See "man tmpfiles.d", it ships with defaults for the tmp
directory.
The directories you
On Sat, 2015-04-11 at 01:59 +0300, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 1:57 AM, dean wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Firstly i apologize if I'm in the wrong place, tell me where
> to go if i
> am ;-).
>
> I am having some permission pro
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 1:57 AM, dean wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Firstly i apologize if I'm in the wrong place, tell me where to go if i
> am ;-).
>
> I am having some permission problems, following is some syslog entries:
>
> gnome-session[2739]: (gnome-settings-daemon:2809):
> housekeeping-plugin-WA
Hi guys,
Firstly i apologize if I'm in the wrong place, tell me where to go if i
am ;-).
I am having some permission problems, following is some syslog entries:
gnome-session[2739]: (gnome-settings-daemon:2809):
housekeeping-plugin-WARNING **: Failed to enumerate children of
/tmp/systemd-private
16 matches
Mail list logo
