On 07/13/2014 10:35 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014, at 06:48 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
please excuse my possibly ignorant questions, selinux is not my forte.
If the files are nonexistent, will this fail? But sysusers should be
able to create /etc from scratch.
True,
Hi,
I was recently bitten by the issue that systemd does not support the
keyscript= option in /etc/crypttab. I don't know whether keyscript= is
a Debian extension, but the migration to systemd (which was pulled in
by some new version of - I think - Network Manager) broke my system's
boot process,
Am 21.07.2014 03:10, schrieb sur...@emailengine.net:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014, at 05:31 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> 2. tell systemd to log less with 'systemd-analyze set-log-level notice'.
>
> Won't that lower the log level 'into' the journal as well?
hopefully
> I'm happy to hav
On 20.07.2014 23:20, poma wrote:
What's so special about i686!?
systemd[1]: Failed to start Login Service.
systemd[1]: Unit systemd-logind.service entered failed state.
systemd[1]: systemd-logind.service has no holdoff time, scheduling restart.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=112141
On 07/11/2014 01:16 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Fri, 11.07.14 13:02, Piotr Wilczek (p.wilc...@samsung.com) wrote:
B) Now, as a shortcut we use the same sock actually, via sendto() to
also pass data to /run/systemd/journal/syslog, which is where a
secondary syslog server should listen on, w
'Twas brillig, and Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek at 21/07/14 03:16 did
gyre and gimble:
> I agree. Not reading /etc/login.defs makes the tool troublesome for
> existing installations.
>
> I've experienced a related problem, where coredumps would not be
> visible for my user on a Fedora machine which
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Piotr Wilczek wrote:
> On 07/11/2014 01:16 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 11.07.14 13:02, Piotr Wilczek (p.wilc...@samsung.com) wrote:
>>
B) Now, as a shortcut we use the same sock actually, via sendto() to
also pass data to /run/systemd/jour
Hi all,
first of all, please forgive me if this is not the right list for
questions of systemd users. In this case, I would appreciate if you
could forward me to the right channel for my question. I couldn't find a
"systemd-users" list.
In my laptop, I do have an encrypted partition on a second H
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 09:38:57AM +0300, Timofey Titovets wrote:
> Just completed TODO:
> * readahead: use BTRFS_IOC_DEFRAG_RANGE instead of BTRFS_IOC_DEFRAG
This is still not an explanation. What is the difference between the
two?
>
> //i save BTRFS_IOC_DEFRAG as fallback, because
> BTRFS_IOC_
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 08:51:52PM +0200, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
>> From recent commits I have noticed the following new issues from
>> static analysis with scan-build and with clang. I am not sure how they
>> should be fix
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Ralf Jung wrote:
> I also tried to figure out how to manually create an appropriate
> "systemd-cryptsetup@" instance so that I wasn't restricted by the
> crypttab generator (and could control the dependencies myself), but I
> couldn't figure out how to tell such an
On 21/07/14 16:05, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 08:51:52PM +0200, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
>>> From recent commits I have noticed the following new issues from
>>> static analysis with scan-build
On Sun, 20.07.14 15:41, sur...@emailengine.net (sur...@emailengine.net) wrote:
> That's a LOT of not very useful "Started Session ## of user root"
> noise in system logs that gets in the way of managing my system.
> Those messages are EnergizerBunny-entries -- they just keep going, and
> going, an
On Sun, 20.07.14 17:44, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
(zbys...@kemper.freedesktop.org) wrote:
Zibigniew,
> New commits:
> commit 0e8415f2e5c42e87ca3b7a96138675f64696cb7a
> Author: Zbigniew J??drzejewski-Szmek
> Date: Sun Jul 20 19:28:58 2014 -0400
>
> man: add systemd-verify(1)
sounds lik
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:41 AM, wrote:
> 2014-07-20T00:15:01.978142-07:00 core systemd[1]: Starting
> Session 2 of user root.
> 2014-07-20T00:15:01.979526-07:00 core systemd[1]: Started
> Session 2 of user root.
> 2014-07-20T00:30:01.065850-07:00
On Mon, 21.07.14 16:18, Mantas Mikulėnas (graw...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:41 AM, wrote:
> > 2014-07-20T00:15:01.978142-07:00 core systemd[1]: Starting
> > Session 2 of user root.
> > 2014-07-20T00:15:01.979526-07:00 core systemd[1]: Started
On Sun, 20.07.14 22:31, Colin Guthrie (gm...@colin.guthr.ie) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We're still using 500 as our [UG]ID_MIN in /etc/login.defs, but I'm
> looking to change that to be more in line with what everyone else seems
> to do.
>
> One thing I found while looking at the sysusers code was that t
On Sun, 20.07.14 22:38, Colin Guthrie (gm...@colin.guthr.ie) wrote:
>
> 'Twas brillig, and Colin Guthrie at 20/07/14 22:31 did gyre and gimble:
> > Those defaults could be set from a compile time check of
> > login.defs too.
>
> FWIW, at least here, /etc/login.defs is not readable by regular use
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 10:26:20AM +0200, Miroslav Grepl wrote:
> On 07/13/2014 10:35 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
> >On Sat, Jul 12, 2014, at 06:48 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >>please excuse my possibly ignorant questions, selinux is not my forte.
> >>If the files are nonexistent, will t
On Mon, 21.07.14 04:16, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
> > I can't really think of any reason as to why this would genuinely help,
> > but then I can't think why a regular user.
> >
> > Not a big deal in this case really tho' - I think the original argument
> > still stand
Am 21.07.2014 15:18, schrieb Mantas Mikulėnas:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 1:41 AM, wrote:
>> 2014-07-20T00:15:01.978142-07:00 core systemd[1]: Starting
>> Session 2 of user root.
>> 2014-07-20T00:15:01.979526-07:00 core systemd[1]: Started
>> Session 2 of user r
On Mon, 21.07.14 13:11, Colin Guthrie (gm...@colin.guthr.ie) wrote:
> That said, it's also not inconceivable that the login.defs is updated
> but user accounts still exist that are in the 500-1000 range. So perhaps
> we should consider adding the same kind of heuristics for handling the
> 500->100
Zbyszek, thanks for comment, i will work on fixing what you say and
resend patch.
>> Just completed TODO:
>> * readahead: use BTRFS_IOC_DEFRAG_RANGE instead of BTRFS_IOC_DEFRAG
>
> This is still not an explanation. What is the difference between the
> two?
I can't explain it, because no i add thi
Just completed TODO:
* refuse mounting on symlinks
I not add this TODO, but i think what it avoid potential
security{and/or} bug issues
If systemd try mounting entry from fstab on symlink, user get something
like that:
Jul 19 15:49:38 beplan.lan systemd[1]: Mounting /var/tmp/symlink...
Jul 1
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 03:18:54PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Sun, 20.07.14 17:44, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> (zbys...@kemper.freedesktop.org) wrote:
>
> Zibigniew,
>
> > New commits:
> > commit 0e8415f2e5c42e87ca3b7a96138675f64696cb7a
> > Author: Zbigniew J??drzejewski-Szmek
> >
On Sat, 19.07.14 16:15, Timofey Titovets (nefelim...@gmail.com) wrote:
Heya,
> +int fail_if_symlink(const char *unit, const char* where) {
> +assert(where);
> +
> +if (!is_symlink(where))
> +return 0;
> +
> +log_warning_unit(unit,
> +
'Twas brillig, and Lennart Poettering at 21/07/14 14:43 did gyre and gimble:
> I am totally not convinced that this would be a good idea, sorry.
No worries, that's why I asked first ;)
Col
--
Colin Guthrie
gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie
http://colin.guthr.ie/
Day Job:
Tribalogic Limited http://www
2014-07-21 17:11 GMT+03:00 Lennart Poettering :
> That would follow our usual coding style very closely...
I know >_<, i do bad looking error codes >_<
Lennart, thanks for explanation, i will fix it and resend patch.
--
Best regards,
Timofey.
___
syste
On 21.07.2014 11:56, poma wrote:
On 20.07.2014 23:20, poma wrote:
What's so special about i686!?
systemd[1]: Failed to start Login Service.
systemd[1]: Unit systemd-logind.service entered failed state.
systemd[1]: systemd-logind.service has no holdoff time, scheduling restart.
https://bugzilla
Zbyszek, i research problem and i found what in btrfs.h
struct btrfs_ioctl_defrag_range_args not defined
This acceptable if i add it in missing.h like:
/* btrfs_ioctl_defrag_range_args now 21.07.2014
* not defined in btrfs.h and duplicated from /fs/btrfs/ctree.h
*/
#ifdef HAVE_LINUX_BTRFS_H
stru
On Sat, 19.07.14 16:04, lux-integ (lux-in...@btconnect.com) wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I have a computer with these
> --OS Linux 64bit BLFS Linux
> --relatively recent version of systemd
> --no hard disk but instead compact flash disk
>
>
> I am running vanilla systemd ( i.e. as compiled fro
Just complete TODO:
* refuse mounting on symlinks
I not add this TODO, but i think what it avoid potential security
{and/or} bug issues
if systemd try mounting entry from fstab on symlink, user get something
systemctl status symlink.mount
● symlink.mount - /symlink
Loaded: loaded (/etc/fs
Just completed TODO:
* readahead: use BTRFS_IOC_DEFRAG_RANGE instead of BTRFS_IOC_DEFRAG
ioctl, with START_IO
commit d3fc81bd6a5a046b22600ac1204df220c93d2c15 refs/tags/v30
Author: Lennart Poettering
Date: Wed Jun 15 15:39:10 2011 +0200
update TODO
i no add this todo in TODO list (recur
Im not sure if we want the help approach or just fail?
I can change this and resed if you want.
Assertion 'strv_uniq(ans)' failed at src/verify/verify.c:53, function
generate_path(). Aborting.
[1]4795 abort (core dumped) systemd-verify
---
src/verify/verify.c | 9 -
1 file changed,
On Mon, 21.07.14 11:36, Tom Gundersen (tome...@kemper.freedesktop.org) wrote:
> +if (b->miimon != 0) {
> +r = sd_rtnl_message_append_u32(m, IFLA_BOND_MIIMON,
> b->miimon / 1000);
We have these nice USEC_PER_MSEC-style macro definitions which make it a
little bit clearer wh
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 8:44 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Mon, 21.07.14 11:36, Tom Gundersen (tome...@kemper.freedesktop.org) wrote:
>
>> +if (b->miimon != 0) {
>> +r = sd_rtnl_message_append_u32(m, IFLA_BOND_MIIMON,
>> b->miimon / 1000);
>
> We have these nice USEC_P
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 08:04:33PM +0200, Daniel Buch wrote:
> Im not sure if we want the help approach or just fail?
>
> I can change this and resed if you want.
>
> Assertion 'strv_uniq(ans)' failed at src/verify/verify.c:53, function
> generate_path(). Aborting.
> [1]4795 abort (core dump
Hi,
I am trying to analyze what all services that would start during boot up
process statically, i.e just by looking into the unit files, without
running the system. I have understood the dependecies of unit files using
Wants, Requires,After but i do not find all of the services which are
listed u
On Mon, 21.07.14 15:43, Lennart Poettering (lenn...@poettering.net) wrote:
> > While I appreciate sysusers is intended primarily for bootstrapping
> > /etc, I guess the general consensus is to move package pre/post scripts
> > over to use sysusers instead anyway. Thus the tool should really check
The old behavior is inconsistent and confusing, this commit simplifies matters
significantly:
Before this commit:
* systemctl try-restart on any inactive unit returns *success* immediately
* systemctl reload on an inactive unit without a queued start job returns
*failure* immediately
* sys
Unless both /usr and /usr/local is mounted in the initrd these
services might miss some of their configuration otherwise.
---
units/systemd-binfmt.service.in | 1 +
units/systemd-modules-load.service.in | 1 +
units/systemd-sysctl.service.in | 1 +
units/systemd-sysusers.service.
This makes no difference if /usr was mounted in the initrd,
and brings the behaviour of legacy systems closer to those
with a propper initrd.
---
src/core/mount.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/core/mount.c b/src/core/mount.c
index 102bbef..39a9aaf 100644
'Twas brillig, and Lennart Poettering at 21/07/14 23:28 did gyre and gimble:
> On Mon, 21.07.14 15:43, Lennart Poettering (lenn...@poettering.net) wrote:
>
>>> While I appreciate sysusers is intended primarily for bootstrapping
>>> /etc, I guess the general consensus is to move package pre/post sc
The return value may be -EINVAL or a positive errno from the dbus
message. Check both ranges, otherwise most errors are silently ignored.
---
src/network/networkd-link.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/network/networkd-link.c b/src/network/networkd-link.c
В Mon, 21 Jul 2014 18:15:37 +0300
Timofey Titovets пишет:
> Zbyszek, i research problem and i found what in btrfs.h
> struct btrfs_ioctl_defrag_range_args not defined
> This acceptable if i add it in missing.h like:
> /* btrfs_ioctl_defrag_range_args now 21.07.2014
> * not defined in btrfs.h an
В Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:51:22 +0300
Timofey Titovets пишет:
> Zbyszek, thanks for comment, i will work on fixing what you say and
> resend patch.
>
> >> Just completed TODO:
> >> * readahead: use BTRFS_IOC_DEFRAG_RANGE instead of BTRFS_IOC_DEFRAG
> >
> > This is still not an explanation. What is t
В Tue, 22 Jul 2014 00:39:13 +0200
Jon Severinsson пишет:
> This makes no difference if /usr was mounted in the initrd,
> and brings the behaviour of legacy systems closer to those
> with a propper initrd.
This should be documented in systemd.special(7) then.
But what exact problem does it solve
At Tuesday 22 July 2014 04:46:31 Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> But what exact problem does it solve?
Units thinking they can read from /usr before local-fs-pre.target
___
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop
Ralf Jung ralfj.de> writes:
>
> Hi all,
>
> first of all, please forgive me if this is not the right list for
> questions of systemd users. In this case, I would appreciate if you
> could forward me to the right channel for my question. I couldn't find a
> "systemd-users" list.
>
> In my lapto
On Fri, 18 Jul 2014, Dan Horák wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:42:21 +0200 (CEST)
Thomas Blume wrote:
Ok, thanks for the input.
Attached is the new patch.
Thomas, do you know whether the VM00 info always refer to the top-level
virt, where the Linux guest runs? I've already seen a 2nd level z/
50 matches
Mail list logo
