Hi all
I succeeded with auto login and auto start of my Virtual Boxes, but could not
get them to do a proper shutdown.
Because of the nature of the VM processes I want to send them a proper ACPI
shutdown button instead of terminating the process, which is done through my
old rc-script.
The
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 23:31, Holger Winkelmann wrote:
> We are about to renovate our embedded toolchain a bit and consider to
> integrate
> systemd as init. We are a bit concerned about the DBUS dependency in systemd
> as
> we have to meet a 4-8 MB hard disk (flash) requirement,
>
> I read abou
Hi Eduardo,
> Hi Holger,
>
> I think we have to blame the uninformed complaints that Systemd is
> only for the desktop because of Dbus.
I was aware of this, but being a freedesktop project this not always
feels server alike.
>
> Dbus can be built without X support. On Gimokod Linux the compress
On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>
> For very simple setups, the D-Bus bus daemon is not absolutely
> necessary, and can probably be made optional with a few changes, but
> the D-Bus protocol is used by systemctl to talk to systemd, and can
> not really be optimized out.
systemctl
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 17:52, Holger Winkelmann [TP]
wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>>
>> For very simple setups, the D-Bus bus daemon is not absolutely
>> necessary, and can probably be made optional with a few changes, but
>> the D-Bus protocol is used by systemctl to t
On 12/04/2011 03:53 PM, Josh Geisser wrote:
Hi,
I succeeded with auto login and auto start of my Virtual Boxes, but could not
get them to do a proper shutdown.
Because of the nature of the VM processes I want to send them a proper ACPI
shutdown button instead of terminating the process, whic
Hi Zbigniew
I added the "| logger" b/c i wanted additional proove that the scripts are
actually executed, and it seems to work, the start-output is logged into
syslog.
But not the ExecStop. I added some more logging and the stop command seems
never to be executed.
Also, the VMs take time t
On Dec 4, 2011, at 6:15 PM, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 17:52, Holger Winkelmann [TP]
> wrote:
>> On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>>>
>>> For very simple setups, the D-Bus bus daemon is not absolutely
>>> necessary, and can probably be made optional with a few ch
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 20:45, Holger Winkelmann wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2011, at 6:15 PM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 17:52, Holger Winkelmann [TP]
>> wrote:
>>> On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Kay Sievers wrote:
For very simple setups, the D-Bus bus daemon is not absolutely
>>
On Dec 5, 2011, at 1:08 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>>
>> Kay, Thanks for the clarifications about private sockets and such. Makes all
>> more sense to me now. your are right, seems not much needs to configured out.
>
> Sounds good. In case it wasn't clear, we are always interested in
> clean patches
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 20:41, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
> I have digested our discussion now. Two questions came up:
>
> The first one is a bit direct and blunt, my apologies for that. But I
> want to make sure I put effort into the right place. Do you see any
> benefit in an interface like I describ
11 matches
Mail list logo
