Re: [systemd-devel] ssh socket activation (Was: systemd unit files for Debian based systems)

2012-06-20 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Wed, 20.06.12 10:17, Mathieu Bridon (boche...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 19:15 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Tue, 19.06.12 18:50, Michael Olbrich (m.olbr...@pengutronix.de) wrote: Hi, On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:03:23AM +0200, Lennart Poettering

Re: [systemd-devel] ssh socket activation (Was: systemd unit files for Debian based systems)

2012-06-20 Thread Mathieu Bridon
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 08:44 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Wed, 20.06.12 10:17, Mathieu Bridon (boche...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 19:15 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Tue, 19.06.12 18:50, Michael Olbrich (m.olbr...@pengutronix.de) wrote: Hi,

Re: [systemd-devel] setting up to allow separate udev and systemd builds

2012-06-20 Thread Olav Vitters
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:44:25PM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote: This is not about the files from systemd. It's about the dependencies. Every user of a source based distro, that only wants systemd now has to first install dbus then udev, and then remove dbus again. Shouldn't the build system

Re: [systemd-devel] setting up to allow separate udev and systemd builds

2012-06-20 Thread Michael Olbrich
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 09:38:22AM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:44:25PM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote: This is not about the files from systemd. It's about the dependencies. Every user of a source based distro, that only wants systemd now has to first install dbus

Re: [systemd-devel] ssh socket activation (Was: systemd unit files for Debian based systems)

2012-06-20 Thread Michael Olbrich
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 07:45:47PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Tue, 19.06.12 23:40, Alexander E. Patrakov (patra...@gmail.com) wrote: IMHO there is one issue with the inetd-style approach: it is explicitly discouraged in man sshd. It may well be the case of outdated documentation,

Re: [systemd-devel] setting up to allow separate udev and systemd builds

2012-06-20 Thread Michael Olbrich
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 01:46:40PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 01:32:52PM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote: On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 09:38:22AM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:44:25PM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote: This is not about the files from

Re: [systemd-devel] setting up to allow separate udev and systemd builds

2012-06-20 Thread microcai
2012/6/19 Kay Sievers k...@vrfy.org On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Michael Olbrich m.olbr...@pengutronix.de wrote: On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:21:58AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Fri, 15.06.12 20:06, Bryan Kadzban (br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net) wrote: dbus libcap I am

Re: [systemd-devel] setting up to allow separate udev and systemd builds

2012-06-20 Thread Olav Vitters
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 02:34:52PM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote: On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 01:46:40PM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 01:32:52PM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote: On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 09:38:22AM +0200, Olav Vitters wrote: Shouldn't the build system do this

[systemd-devel] 'Offline System Updates' examination

2012-06-20 Thread Antonio Trande
'Offline System Updates' will come as feature for Fedora 18. Reading your official page http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/SystemUpdates: The system update script now creates a btrfs snapshot (if possible), then installs all RPMs. After completion (regardless whether the update

Re: [systemd-devel] setting up to allow separate udev and systemd builds

2012-06-20 Thread William Hubbs
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 09:40:39PM +0200, Robert Schwebel wrote: Currently, the workflow would be like this: 1) build other components 2a) build prerequisites necessary for systemd, which are otherwhise unneeded; this needs to be installed into the local sysroot in order to let

Re: [systemd-devel] login/logout hooks in fedora 17?

2012-06-20 Thread Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
On 06/18/2012 10:42 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 18.06.12 10:04, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano (na...@ccrma.stanford.edu) wrote: Thanks for any advice! Hmm, so there are multiple ways to achieve this, but it really depends on what you are trying to do here. May I ask what kind of script

Re: [systemd-devel] Minimal builds

2012-06-20 Thread William Hubbs
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 06:22:49PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: Heya, regarding the whole discussion on minimal builds and people wanting to pick specific parts of the systemd build leaving out others, beyond what the configure switches offer: Here are some guidelines how we recommend

Re: [systemd-devel] setting up to allow separate udev and systemd builds

2012-06-20 Thread Robert Schwebel
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 01:46:41PM -0700, Kok, Auke-jan H wrote: You could easily build dbus-for-systemd inside the systemd buildroot, and never install dbus to the sysroot, but in a temporary location. After building the local dbus, system and udev, you just make install in only the udev

Re: [systemd-devel] Minimal builds

2012-06-20 Thread Kok, Auke-jan H
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 1:49 AM, microcai micro...@fedoraproject.org wrote: 2012/6/21 William Hubbs w.d.hu...@gmail.com On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 06:22:49PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: regarding the whole discussion on minimal builds and people wanting to pick specific parts of the

Re: [systemd-devel] login/logout hooks in fedora 17?

2012-06-20 Thread Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
On 06/18/2012 10:42 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 18.06.12 10:04, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano (na...@ccrma.stanford.edu) wrote: Thanks for any advice! Hmm, so there are multiple ways to achieve this, but it really depends on what you are trying to do here. May I ask what kind of script you

Re: [systemd-devel] Minimal builds

2012-06-20 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
]] William Hubbs Another thing to think about from our side is, although the main components compile quickly on a pc, how long would it take to compile everything on an ARM-based machine for example? I have no idea, so it could end up being really annoying to users of that platform for us