Hi
For my service, I have:
# cat my.service
[Unit]
Description=My Service
After=dbus.service
Requires=dbus.service
...
...
Some time i see that my service fails to get dbus connection
(dbus_bus_get_private() fails without any error msg).
one possibility i think is that dbus is not fully initiali
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 09:47:24AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
>On Tue, 2017-04-25 at 07:45 +, David Härdeman wrote:
>> April 24, 2017 5:49 PM, "Dan Williams" wrote:
>>>
>>> It's not clear that the GNOME side was implemented correctly yet.
>>> Would be nice to see the sample code.
>>>
>>> Dan
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 09:21:19PM +0200, David Härdeman wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 09:54:45AM +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
>>No, it does not. sd-bus was inconsistent. See, there are 3 things
>>involved in the Object-Manager:
>>
>>Signal: InterfacesAdded
>>Signal: InterfacesRemoved
>>Call: Get
Sorry, I did not explain myself clearly. systemd is doing nothing wrong.
What I'd like to do is find an optimal way to notify our monitoring system
(zabbix) that a service is flapping. We can probably script something.
Just looking to see if there's a more elegant way. Looking also at
OnFailure
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 09:54:45AM +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 9:40 AM, David Härdeman wrote:
>> April 21, 2017 1:22 PM, "David Herrmann" wrote:
>>> This change makes sure all objects have the built-in interfaces
>>> reported at all times. The GetManagedObjects() call di
Hi all,
First of all this is my first email to this list so apologies if it's not
worded perfectly.
I am wondering if there's any plan to support Domain Search List option in
networkd. Some cloud providers like GCE, advertise multiple search domains
through option 119 and they just get ignored in
Am 25.04.2017 um 17:30 schrieb Jeremy Eder:
If we have a service that is flapping because it's crashing after
startup...what's the right way to monitor for that condition?
Eventually it triggers startburstlimit, was thinking that if we hit
startburstlimit that the service could set some spec
hello,
in a fully-volatile boot scenario /usr from a physical disk gets mounted on
top of an instance of a tmpfs. my first question is why is that necessary?
(the tmpfs part i mean)
my second question is, would it be possible to do the same but rather than
mounting the /usr *populate* the said tm
If we have a service that is flapping because it's crashing after
startup...what's the right way to monitor for that condition? Eventually
it triggers startburstlimit, was thinking that if we hit startburstlimit
that the service could set some special bit that we could look for.
Like ... systemct
On Tue, 2017-04-25 at 07:45 +, David Härdeman wrote:
> April 24, 2017 5:49 PM, "Dan Williams" wrote:
> > On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 16:50 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > On Fri, 21.04.17 13:22, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com)
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > Anyway, gdbus bugs aside, i
On Tue, 25.04.17 10:17, Trent Lloyd (tr...@lloyd.id.au) wrote:
> I had two general thoughts,
>
> (a) Can I make a unit change to "improve" the situation, for example adding
> PartOf=avahi-daemon.service to avahi-daemon.socket. I have noticed that
> CUPS and Docker (err, moby) seem to ship this t
I have probably discovered the cause, and it is, that the memory image
would be too large to fit in the swap space, and I would have to
increase the swap space.
W dniu 25.04.2017 o 05:34, Andrei Borzenkov pisze:
> 25.04.2017 04:45, Michał Zegan пишет:
>> Hello.
>>
>> I have archlinux with systemd
On Tue, 25 Apr 2017 at 09:55:16 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> If you now
> introduce a third set of search paths /usr/lib/systemd/session, then
> you'll open an entirely new can of worms, as no apps install their
> unit files there, and you'd have to convince every single one of them
> to do s
Hey
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Tue, 25.04.17 09:54, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> >> This change makes sure all objects have the built-in interfaces
>> >> reported at all times. The GetManagedObjects() call didn't report them
>> >> so far
On Tue, 25.04.17 09:54, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >> This change makes sure all objects have the built-in interfaces
> >> reported at all times. The GetManagedObjects() call didn't report them
> >> so far.
> >
> > Quite the contrary? If you look at the output from dbus-monito
April 25, 2017 9:54 AM, "David Herrmann" wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 9:40 AM, David Härdeman wrote:
>
>> April 21, 2017 1:22 PM, "David Herrmann" wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:50 AM, David Härdeman wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:19:22PM +0200, David Herrmann wro
Hi
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 9:40 AM, David Härdeman wrote:
> April 21, 2017 1:22 PM, "David Herrmann" wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:50 AM, David Härdeman wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:19:22PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:06 PM, David Härdeman wrote
On Mon, 24.04.17 20:09, Benno Fünfstück (benno.fuenfstu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Thank you Lennart for taking the time to answer my question. It does make
> sense that you wouldn't want to support multiple sessions in big desktop
> environments like Gnome or KDE or any complex software.
>
> However
April 24, 2017 5:49 PM, "Dan Williams" wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 16:50 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> On Fri, 21.04.17 13:22, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com) wrote:
>>
> Anyway, gdbus bugs aside, it seems that the interfaces
> reported by
> sd-bus should match what gd
April 21, 2017 1:22 PM, "David Herrmann" wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:50 AM, David Härdeman wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 02:19:22PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:06 PM, David Härdeman wrote:
>> I'm implementing a server which creates an ObjectManager usi
April 24, 2017 4:51 PM, "Lennart Poettering" wrote:
> On Fri, 21.04.17 13:22, David Herrmann (dh.herrm...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> Anyway, gdbus bugs aside, it seems that the interfaces reported by
>> sd-bus should match what gdbus does? (assuming, of course, that gdbus
>> can be considered the "r
>
> Increased complexity in *all* software — each and every thing you start
> must
> support multiple sessions.
>
Oh, why is that? I wasn't suggesting to replace the existing systemd --user
instance, only to add a new one for each session. So software that does not
support multiple sessions still
22 matches
Mail list logo