Re: [systemd-devel] Q: journalctl -g

On Fri, 4 Mar 2022, Ulrich Windl wrote: > Hi! > > In SLES15 SP3 (systemd-246.16-7.33.1.x86_64) I have this effect, wondering > whether it is a bug or a feature: > When using "journalctl -b -g raid" I see that _ome_ matches are highlighted > in red, but others aren't. For example: > Mar 01

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd.sockets vs xinetd

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022, Yolo von BNANA wrote: > Hello, > > i read the following in an LPIC 1 Book: > > " If you’ve done any investigation into systemd.sockets, you may believe > that it makes super servers like xinetd obsolete. At this point in time, > that is not true. The xinetd super server

Re: [systemd-devel] Systemd hang when restarting a service during shutdown

On Mon, 8 Nov 2021, Sean Nyekjaer wrote: > Hi, > > Regarding, > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/21203 > > I think the point of the issue missed when the issue got closed. > > We have a service that is changing configs for systemd-networkd and > issuing a `systemctl restart

Re: [systemd-devel] masking --global, but allowing --user

On Sat, 18 Sep 2021, Matt Zagrabelny wrote: > Greetings, > > I believe the Debian package of mpd enables a --global .service and > .socket unit for the mpd daemon/service. > > I'd like to mask that and install it just to a single --user service. Why do you need to mask the socket and service at

Re: [systemd-devel] Why systemd-journald is creating '/var/log/journal/machine_id" directory when Storage=auto

On Sun, 29 Aug 2021, Nishant Nayan wrote: > Awesome, thanks! > > Also, where can I find the code section where services And kernel logs to > journald? > After tracing from 'main' at journald.c I came across the part where > various sockets are opened and validated (/run/systemd/journal/stdout, >

Re: [systemd-devel] Why systemd-journald is creating '/var/log/journal/machine_id" directory when Storage=auto

On Sun, 29 Aug 2021, Nishant Nayan wrote: > Also I was wondering where in the code does journald.config file changes > are parsed? > For example in the above code , the line :- > if (s->storage == STORAGE_PERSISTENT) > Here, s->storage corresponds to 'Storage' option of conf file right? >

Re: [systemd-devel] Why systemd-journald is creating '/var/log/journal/machine_id" directory when Storage=auto

On Sun, 29 Aug 2021, Nishant Nayan wrote: > I was looking into the code of systemd-journald and found this (in > system_journal_open() ) :- > > if (!s->system_journal && IN_SET(s->storage, STORAGE_PERSISTENT, > STORAGE_AUTO) && (flush_requested || flushed_flag_is_set())) { > > /* If

Re: [systemd-devel] Why systemd-journald is creating '/var/log/journal/machine_id" directory when Storage=auto

On Sun, 29 Aug 2021, Nishant Nayan wrote: > I was looking into the code of systemd-journald and found this (in > system_journal_open() ) :- > > if (!s->system_journal && IN_SET(s->storage, STORAGE_PERSISTENT, > STORAGE_AUTO) && (flush_requested || flushed_flag_is_set())) { > > /* If

Re: [systemd-devel] [hostnamed] Why the service will automatically exit after 30 seconds

On Thu, 19 Aug 2021, Michael Chapman wrote: > On Thu, 19 Aug 2021, Cristian Rodríguez wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 9:35 PM 李成刚 wrote: > > > > > > How to configure this service so that it will not automatically exit > > > > > > So what are yo

Re: [systemd-devel] [hostnamed] Why the service will automatically exit after 30 seconds

On Thu, 19 Aug 2021, Cristian Rodríguez wrote: > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 9:35 PM 李成刚 wrote: > > > > How to configure this service so that it will not automatically exit > > > So what are you trying to accomplish with this ? why do you need yet > another service running when it is totally idle ?

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Re: [systemd‑devel] systemctl log verbosity

On Wed, 18 Aug 2021, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 18.08.2021 um 08:38 in > Nachricht : > > On Wed, 18 Aug 2021, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >> >>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 17.08.2021 um 02:52 > in > >> Nachricht &

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Re: [systemd‑devel] systemctl log verbosity

On Wed, 18 Aug 2021, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 17.08.2021 um 02:52 in > Nachricht <885331af-bb7-41d0-e8-26c92023b...@very.puzzling.org>: > > On Tue, 17 Aug 2021, Dave Close wrote: > >> I'm trying to run "systemctl show" in

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl log verbosity

On Tue, 17 Aug 2021, Dave Close wrote: > I'm trying to run "systemctl show" in a cron script. It works but I get > a huge number of extra lines in my log for each run. Why? Can this be > suppressed. I don't want to overfill the log. > > There is nothing in the man page (that I noticed) indicating

Re: [systemd-devel] Is `kernel-install` called automatically?

On Sat, 17 Jul 2021, Mike Beaton wrote: > > I've managed to get it to be called > automatically on both Fedora and CentOS/Rocky 8 > > Thank you. How? I'm not asking for excruciating detail, just roughly. Your > own scripts, or something in the distribution? On Fedora, the kernel-core RPM's

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: Q; syslog.socket dependency

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021, Ulrich Windl wrote: [...] > > Can you think of a better way of wording the documentation? > > It depends: Do you consider /dev/log to be a "syslog socket"? > (I'm not running rsyslog there) I'm not quite sure what you mean. If where you're going is "well *obviously*

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Re: Q; syslog.socket dependency

On Fri, 12 Mar 2021, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Reindl Harald schrieb am 11.03.2021 um 16:23 in > Nachricht <4422087b-9966-e7fb-66ad-4157d83f2...@thelounge.net>: > > > > > Am 11.03.21 um 12:17 schrieb Ulrich Windl: > >> Hi! > >> > >> I have a unit that uses logger, and I want to run it after

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Antw: Re: Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: Still confused with socket activation

On Tue, 9 Feb 2021, Ulrich Windl wrote: [...] > OK, I tried (staring libvirtd.service with --listen and without --timout): > Feb 09 10:59:23 h18 libvirtd[42540]: --listen parameter not permitted with > systemd activation sockets, see 'man libvirtd' for further guidance > Feb 09 10:59:23 h18

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: Still confused with socket activation

On Tue, 9 Feb 2021, Ulrich Windl wrote: [...] > > > > libvirt can be run without socket activation [2]. I strongly recommend you > > configure it this way if you intend to manage libvirt in Pacemaker. > > Yes, I'd like to! Any pointers? Follow the link. It's all described there.

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: Still confused with socket activation

On Tue, 9 Feb 2021, Ulrich Windl wrote: [...] > At what timne exactly? When pacemaker starts, or when the systemd using is > about to be started? Pacemaker adds the drop-in just before it starts the resource, and it removes the drop-in just after it stops the resource. It's entire purpose is to

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Re: Still confused with socket activation

On Tue, 9 Feb 2021, Ulrich Windl wrote: [...] > As for the drop-ins: I neither know what those are expected to do, not who > adds them at run time. See "documentation"... The 50-pacemaker.conf drop-ins are, as their name suggests, created by Pacemaker. Specifically, Pacemaker's systemd resource

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: [EXT] Re: Still confused with socket activation

On Tue, 9 Feb 2021, Michael Chapman wrote: [...] > Note that when you're using Pacemaker to manage a systemd service, you > should not enable the service in the normal way -- that is, the service > should not be started simply by virtue of it being in the Wants= list of > multi

Re: [systemd-devel] non-existent unit instances

On Sat, 5 Sep 2020, Richard Hector wrote: > Hi all, > > Quoting from another thread: > > On 5/09/20 4:36 am, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > Unit instances can be activated on-the-fly without further prepartion > > or regsitration of the instance string or so. it's sufficient if the > > template

Re: [systemd-devel] Ensuring that a unit starts before any networking

On Sat, 27 Jun 2020, Mark Rogers wrote: > On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 11:06, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > wrote: > > You should use Before=network-pre.target, Wants=network-pre.target. > > Thanks, tried that but still not working: It could very well be because of the dhcpcd.service you're using. I

Re: [systemd-devel] Failed to activate service 'org.freedesktop.systemd1': timed out

On Mon, 18 May 2020, Debraj Manna wrote: > Around the same time I am seeing the below error in syslog > > May 18 08:49:24 platform3 systemd[1]: Removed slice User Slice of support. > May 18 08:49:27 platform3 systemd[1]: Assertion 's->type == > SERVICE_ONESHOT' failed at

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd update "forgets" ordering for shutdown

On Sun, 17 May 2020, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > 17.05.2020 03:32, Michael Chapman пишет: > > On Fri, 15 May 2020, Frank Steiner wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I need to run a script on shutdown before any other service is stopped. > >> Due to an advice Le

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd update "forgets" ordering for shutdown

On Sun, 17 May 2020, Michael Chapman wrote: > On Fri, 15 May 2020, Frank Steiner wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I need to run a script on shutdown before any other service is stopped. > > Due to an advice Lennart gave a while ago I'm using this service file > > (with mu

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd update "forgets" ordering for shutdown

On Fri, 15 May 2020, Frank Steiner wrote: > Hi, > > I need to run a script on shutdown before any other service is stopped. > Due to an advice Lennart gave a while ago I'm using this service file > (with multi-user.target being our default runlevel target): > > [Unit] > After=multi-user.target >

Re: [systemd-devel] Using *.path units without races?

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020, Uwe Geuder wrote: [...] > > PathChanged= and PathModified= each map down to a set of inotify > > events. It's the kernel's inotify system that determines whether the > > file changed or modified, not systemd. > > My understanding is that since >

Re: [systemd-devel] Using *.path units without races?

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020, Uwe Geuder wrote: [...] > The manual page is not very specific about how that is supposed to work > IMHO, but I could imagine the following distinction: > > PathExists=, PathExistsGlob=, and DirectoryNotEmpty= are absolute > predicates. When setting the path unit to waiting

Re: [systemd-devel] Using *.path units without races?

On Wed, 18 Mar 2020, Uwe Geuder wrote: > Hi! > > I have wondered for a while how I can use *.path units without (too bad) > races. > > Since > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/13509/commits/06582e42de65a61d0238a18720a12b6353edb7cd > the behaviour has been become much clearer, but I must

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd-timesyncd - use unprivileged ports

On Thu, 12 Mar 2020, Jędrzej Dudkiewicz wrote: [...] > And one more question: what is systemd-timedated? It seems that is > exactly same thing, but I don't think this is true? It's the DBus service that most bits of timedatectl talk to. timedatectl doesn't modify system configuration directly.

Re: [systemd-devel] show journalctl while stopping?

On Fri, 24 Jan 2020, Roger Pack wrote: > Forgive me if this is too naive, but would it be possible for > systemctl to "immediately start outputting logs" (journalctl type > output) while it is in the middle of running a command? Ex: while > running "systemctl stop my_server" it could show the

Re: [systemd-devel] disable "InaccessiblePaths" with a dropin

On Thu, 9 Jan 2020, Reindl Harald wrote: > Hi > > deployed http.service contains: > > * InaccessiblePaths=-/usr/bin/bash > * InaccessiblePaths=-/usr/bin/dash > * InaccessiblePaths=-/usr/bin/sh > > now there is one instance where passthru() in a php script is desired > >

Re: [systemd-devel] Portable service and bind paths

On Mon, 6 Jan 2020, Claes H wrote: > Turns out the problem was not with the mount - that was working well. > Instead it was a user problem and I did not realize the process ran as > root and used a different home directory. > When I added the user homeassistant in the host and added it to the >

Re: [systemd-devel] How to execute Shell before rootfs mount on centos7

On Sat, 30 Nov 2019, Ankele zhang wrote: > Hello All: > How to execute shell before rootfs mounted on CentOS7. > On CentOS6, we can modify init shell in initramfs.img to do something > we need. But on CentOS7 my beloved init has be changed to systemd and > systemd has no shell script.

Re: [systemd-devel] Make systemd-localed modify the kernel commandline for the initrd keymap?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 26-09-2019 11:10, Michael Chapman wrote: > > On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, Hans de Goede wrote: > > [...] > >> I believe that the best alternative is to have localed append / update > >> a rd.vconsole.keymap

Re: [systemd-devel] Make systemd-localed modify the kernel commandline for the initrd keymap?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019, Hans de Goede wrote: [...] > I believe that the best alternative is to have localed append / update > a rd.vconsole.keymap=foo argument to the kernel commandline, to override > the vconsole.conf KEYMAP setting, but only in the initrd (so that later > runtime changes when

Re: [systemd-devel] Unload disabled units

On Sun, 15 Sep 2019, Daniel Duong wrote: > Hi, > > I have a 2 template units: 1 for a service and 1 for a socket. Each > instance is a version of my web application. > > After a successful deploy, I stop and disable the old version and I > enable the new one: > systemctl start

Re: [systemd-devel] Unload disabled units

On Mon, 16 Sep 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 16.09.19 um 09:36 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > > Normally units should be unloaded immediately if they are stopped > > and didn't fail. What systemd version are you using? > > the better question is which one are you using because this

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd243rc2, sysd-coredump is not triggered on segfaults

On Tue, 3 Sep 2019, Chris Murphy wrote: > Maybe it's something unique to gnome-shell segfaults, that's the only > thing I have crashing right now. But I've got a pretty good reproducer > to get it to crash and I never have any listings with coredumpctl. > > process segfaults but systemd-coredump

Re: [systemd-devel] /etc/fstab dependences migrated between units due to automount feature

On Sat, 31 Aug 2019, Daniel Otero Oubiña wrote: > I forgot to say that the devices on crypttab are also configured with > `noauto`, that's why I was adding the dependences manually. Even with `noauto`, the manual dependency isn't needed. The dependencies I described were all about the block

Re: [systemd-devel] /etc/fstab dependences migrated between units due to automount feature

On Fri, 30 Aug 2019, Daniel Otero Oubiña wrote: > Hi all! > > I have found a somehow strange systemd "feature" that I'm not sure if it's > a bug. Let me know if you prefer having this reported on GitHub instead. > > First, let me explain my setup: I have a data filesystem that is split in > two

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: help: unmounting iscsi xfs filesystem without using netdev in /etc/fstab

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: [...] > > If you're not using the _netdev keyword, and systemd does not otherwise > > think this is a remote filesystem, you will need to add this dependency > > manually. You'll probably also want: > > > > Wants=network‑online.target > >

Re: [systemd-devel] help: unmounting iscsi xfs filesystem without using netdev in /etc/fstab

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Tony Rodriguez wrote: > Managed to detect/mount iscsi devices without using _netdev keyword in > /etc/fstab.  Made changes within src/fstab-generator/ftstab-generator.c and it > seems to work.  The only problem is during shutdown/reboot, my iscsi xfs > filesystem does not

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd's connections to /run/systemd/private ?

On Fri, 16 Aug 2019, Uoti Urpala wrote: > On Thu, 2019-08-15 at 20:36 +1000, Michael Chapman wrote: > > With systemd 239 I was unable to cause an fd leak this way. > > > > Still, I would feel more comfortable if I could find a commit that > > defini

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd's connections to /run/systemd/private ?

On Thu, 15 Aug 2019, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mi, 14.08.19 22:36, Michael Chapman (m...@very.puzzling.org) wrote: > > > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > Well, a D-Bus connection can remain open indefinitely, and may even > > > have inc

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd's connections to /run/systemd/private ?

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Lennart Poettering wrote: > Well, a D-Bus connection can remain open indefinitely, and may even > have incomplete "half" messages queued in them as long as the client > desires. After the initial authentication is done, clients may thus > take up resources as long as they

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: systemd's connections to /run/systemd/private ?

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 14.08.19 um 12:41 schrieb Michael Chapman: > > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: > >> Am 14.08.19 um 12:10 schrieb Ulrich Windl: > >>>>>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 14.08.2019 um > >>>&g

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: systemd's connections to /run/systemd/private ?

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 14.08.19 um 12:10 schrieb Ulrich Windl: > >>>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 14.08.2019 um 11:47 > >>>> in > >> That's all true, but the thing we need to check here is that systemd > >> correc

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: systemd's connections to /run/systemd/private ?

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 14.08.2019 um 11:47 in > Nachricht : > > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Lennart Poettering wrote: > >> Quite frankly, invoking generic UNIX programs with fds < 3 closed is a > >> really ba

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd's connections to /run/systemd/private ?

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Lennart Poettering wrote: > Quite frankly, invoking generic UNIX programs with fds < 3 closed is a > really bad idea in general. That systemctl nowadays is particularly > careful and deals with situations like that is not an invitation to > actually invoke things like this.

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd's connections to /run/systemd/private ?

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Michael Chapman wrote: > On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Brian Reichert wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 07:18:20PM +, Zbigniew J??drzejewski-Szmek > > wrote: > > > Yes. (With the caveat that there *are* legitimate reasons to have new > > > lon

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd's connections to /run/systemd/private ?

On Wed, 14 Aug 2019, Brian Reichert wrote: > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 07:18:20PM +, Zbigniew J??drzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > Yes. (With the caveat that there *are* legitimate reasons to have new > > long-lived fds created, so not every long-lived fd is "wrong".) > > I finally was able to track

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Q: ConditionPathExists=

On Wed, 5 Jun 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Reindl Harald schrieb am 04.06.2019 um 14:23 in > Nachricht <4e4bc6ca-2637-b10d-f4f6-536f45264...@thelounge.net>: > > > > > Am 04.06.19 um 14:17 schrieb Ulrich Windl: > [...] > > BTW: can you please only reply to the list instead reply all, your > >

Re: [systemd-devel] Wtrlt: Re: Antw: Re: Unexplainable unit restart ("Start request repeated too quickly")

On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 04.06.2019 um 11:04 in > Nachricht : [...] > > As you can see, even E.service was only started once. > > > > Are you sure you were actually doing everything in one transaction? > >

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Unexplainable unit restart ("Start request repeated too quickly")

On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 03.06.2019 um 13:14 in > Nachricht : > [...] > > > > Um, OK. I don't think we're any closer to solving your problem though. :-) > > Actually I am! > The root of the prob

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Unexplainable unit restart ("Start request repeated too quickly")

On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Reindl Harald schrieb am 03.06.2019 um 12:35 in > Nachricht : > > > > > Am 03.06.19 um 12:30 schrieb Ulrich Windl: > >>> That looks fine, though it _might_ make sense for it to have > >>> RemainAfterExit= turned on. After all, if default.target or

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Unexplainable unit restart ("Start request repeated too quickly")

On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: >>>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 03.06.2019 um 11:39 > in > Nachricht : > > On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: > > [...] > >> Hi! > >> > >> The generator unit is: > >>

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Unexplainable unit restart ("Start request repeated too quickly")

On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: [...] > Hi! > > The generator unit is: > [Unit] > Description=I/O performance monitor instance generator > Documentation=man:iotwatch-generator(8) man:iotwatch@.service(8) > Wants=nss-user-lookup.target time-sync.target paths.target >

Re: [systemd-devel] Unexplainable unit restart ("Start request repeated too quickly")

On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: > Hi! > > When installing a test package, I noticed that one unit > (iotwatch-generator.service) triggered a restart for an unknown reason. The > status is (note: no reason for restart shown): > > # systemctl status iotwatch-generator.service -l > ●

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: suggestion: auto reload as the default to help packagers?

On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > 03.06.2019 10:15, Ulrich Windl пишет: > >>>> Michael Chapman schrieb am 31.05.2019 um 13:28 > >>>> in > > Nachricht : > >> On Fri, 31 May 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: > >>> Am 31.05.1

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: suggestion: auto reload as the default to help packagers?

On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, Ulrich Windl wrote: [...] > Where is the definitive documentation for these (rather new) RPM features? https://rpm.org/user_doc/file_triggers.html For Fedora specifically: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/ > And do all the major RPM-based

Re: [systemd-devel] suggestion: auto reload as the default to help packagers?

On Fri, 31 May 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: [...] > [harry@srv-rhsoft:/downloads/f28-f29]$ cat *.txt | grep -i "changed on disk" > Warning: The unit file, source configuration file or drop-ins of > mlocate-updatedb.timer changed on disk. Run 'systemctl daemon-reload' to > reload units. [...]

Re: [systemd-devel] suggestion: auto reload as the default to help packagers?

On Fri, 31 May 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 31.05.19 um 12:31 schrieb Michael Chapman: > > For RPM on Fedora, the systemd package has %transfiletriggerin and > > %transfiletriggerun scriptlets that run automatically at the end of the > > RPM transaction if units were

Re: [systemd-devel] suggestion: auto reload as the default to help packagers?

On Fri, 31 May 2019, Roger Pack wrote: > Had a thought the other day... > > Seems like many packages (ex: rpm's) that includes a *.service file > may eventually be required to call > > systemctl daemon-reload > > in the package, for new file changes to "take." > > This causes bugs like >

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

... > > On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Michael Chapman wrote > >Make of that what you will. I was expecting a.service to stop because > >b.service failed, but apparently my understanding of this isn't quite > >right. > > Requires= alone without After= has interesting inte

Re: [systemd-devel] .service and .socket

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 02.01.19 um 11:49 schrieb Michael Chapman: > > On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: > > [...] > >> agreed, but why can't have socket simply optional a [Service] section to > >> save the "demo@.service"

Re: [systemd-devel] .service and .socket

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: [...] > agreed, but why can't have socket simply optional a [Service] section to > save the "demo@.service" in cases like below? > > [root@client:/etc/systemd/system]$ cat demo.socket > [Unit] > Description=Demo Server - Activation Socket > > [Socket] >

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 02.01.19 um 09:14 schrieb Michael Chapman: > > I have two services on my system, A.service and B.service, where A.service > > Wants=B.service but is ordered Before=B.service. The reason for this is > > that when I start A I want

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Jérémy Rosen wrote: > So... > >> Requires = Wants + PartOf > >> Requires + After = Wants  + PartOf + Requisite + After > >> > >> better ? > >> My goal is to try to clarify that in the documentation at some point... > > I don't think Requisite= comes into it at all. > > > >

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Jérémy Rosen wrote: > > > On 02/01/2019 10:08, Michael Chapman wrote: > > > >> Requires = Wants + Requisite + PartOf > >> > >> is that correct ? > > I think it's just: > > > >Requires = Wants + PartOf > >

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Jérémy Rosen wrote: > > > In my opinion, I don't think the extra inconsistency we get from this is > > worth it. It literally only saves one line in a unit file. > > > It's not about saving a line in the unit file, it's about avoiding errors on > the most common case > > i.e

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 9:14 AM Michael Chapman wrote: > > > What good is an activation dependency without an ordering dependency? > > > > The problem is that it's not necessarily clear _which_ ordering dependency > > i

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 07:14:10PM +1100, Michael Chapman wrote: [...] > > The problem is that it's not necessarily clear _which_ ordering dependency > > is required. systemd can't just assume one way or the other. >

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 12:05:46PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Evverx suggested I ask here @ > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/11284 > > It's about Requires and After. I think a unit in Requires should imply

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Jérémy Rosen wrote: > > >> What's the benefit of not having After= for those services? > >I guess they can start and do their initialization in parallel with > > the service they require. > In that case, what is the benefit or Requires vs Wants ? > > I might be missing

Re: [systemd-devel] Requires and After

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:22 AM James Feeney wrote: > > systemd has two different classes of "dependencies": 1) "activation" > > dependencies, and 2) "ordering" dependencies. > > > > An activation dependency does not, a priori, have to obey any rules

Re: [systemd-devel] .service and .socket

On Tue, 1 Jan 2019, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > Hi, > > AFAIK socket units require a separate file, which seems more complex > then it has to be. > > 1. Could sockets be specified directly in the .service file? If anything, I should think it would work the other way around: a .socket without

Re: [systemd-devel] Environment-variable security?

On Tue, 13 Nov 2018, David Parsley wrote: > I already scrub the environment when executing external scripts, and I've > found that even after os.Unsetenv(...) the full environment is available to > all processes owned by the robot in /proc//environ. I'm a bit hesitent to enter this

Re: [systemd-devel] When does a systemctl start ... returns to prompt?

On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, Wojtek Swiatek wrote: > Le mer. 29 août 2018 à 10:03, Michael Chapman a > écrit : > > Thank you for the clarification. > > > > > Question 2: how can I configure the prog_two/prog_three case, i.e. having > > > them starting one afte

Re: [systemd-devel] When does a systemctl start ... returns to prompt?

On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, Wojtek Swiatek wrote: > Hello everyone > > systemctl start myserv.service sometimes immediately returns to the shell > prompt and sometimes stays until the program is done. Specifically, taking > the example of two programs > > - prog_one which starts in the foreground and

Re: [systemd-devel] Restarting a service as user instead as root

On Mon, 13 Aug 2018, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > 2018-08-13 11:51 GMT+02:00 Michael Chapman : > > > On Mon, 13 Aug 2018, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > > > I have a service that is run as a different user as root. But only root > > can > > > restart the service. Is th

Re: [systemd-devel] Restarting a service as user instead as root

On Mon, 13 Aug 2018, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > I have a service that is run as a different user as root. But only root can > restart the service. Is there a way to make 'systemctl restart' work for > the user that runs the service? You could simply add some Sudo rules allowing the user to perform

Re: [systemd-devel] Restarting a systemd service with new command line options from systemctl?

On Sat, 7 Jul 2018, Rick Beldin wrote: [...] > # systemctl restart systemd-udevd --debug > systemctl: unrecognized option '--debug' You would need to override the service's ExecStart= setting if you wanted to do it that way. > Is there a more supported way of doing this with systemctl for

Re: [systemd-devel] getgroups returning a diferent result

On Fri, 15 Jun 2018, Jérémy Rosen wrote: > Partial answer, I don't know all the details... > > We are all taught in school that each unix user belongs to to a certain number > of groups, and that is defined in /etc/passwd. > > That's kinda true, but it's an oversimplification. > > Each PROCESS

Re: [systemd-devel] option to wait for pid file to appear

On Thu, 7 Jun 2018, Igor Bukanov wrote: > On 18 May 2018 at 19:37, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > On Do, 17.05.18 22:54, Igor Bukanov (i...@mir2.org) wrote: > > Well, no. The protocol is clear, and what we do is pretty close to > > black magic, and still racy in many ways. > > > > I mean, broken

Re: [systemd-devel] option to wait for pid file to appear

On Thu, 17 May 2018, Igor Bukanov wrote: > On 17 May 2018 at 12:07, Michael Chapman <m...@very.puzzling.org> wrote: > > It _is_ better for the PID file to be written out before the initial > > process exits, but systemd will handle things correctly even if they > >

Re: [systemd-devel] option to wait for pid file to appear

On Thu, 17 May 2018, Igor Bukanov wrote: > Hi, > > I have a service unit for nginx that uses Type=forking and PIDFile. > That works, but occasionally I see in the log a message like > > nginx.service: PID file /run/nginx/nginx.pid not readable (yet?) after > start: No such file or directory > >

Re: [systemd-devel] Stacked automount dependencies

On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, Kenneth Porter wrote: I need to automount a couple cifs shares on a NAS box, with one share mounted to a directory within another share: /srv/share0/share1 This probably isn't going to work the way you want. Starting the share1 automount will itself cause share0 to be

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd-sysusers

On Mon, 5 Feb 2018, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 05.02.2018 um 06:56 schrieb Michael Chapman: On Mon, 5 Feb 2018, Johannes Ernst wrote: It appears systemd-sysusers does not create home directories. On the other hand, it picks (largely unpredictable) UIDs from a range. So I have to run systemd

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd-sysusers

On Mon, 5 Feb 2018, Johannes Ernst wrote: It appears systemd-sysusers does not create home directories. On the other hand, it picks (largely unpredictable) UIDs from a range. So I have to run systemd-sysusers, and after that, find the UID of the user and chown the home directory? Or is there

Re: [systemd-devel] Again, why this strange behavior implied by "auto" in fstab ?

On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Thomas Blume wrote: [...] Suppressing the auto mount when a device (re)appears, is usually desired during some administrative tasks. What about lowering the hurdle for administrators by introducing a new systemctl command? Maybe something like: systemctl lock $DEVICE We

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl is-active command returns inactive even if the unit does not exist

On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Kevin Hsu wrote: Hi folks, "systemctl is-active" command gives "inactive" no matter the unit exists and indeed inactive or it just not exist. This behavior is semantically true since a unit can never be active if it does not exist. But "systemctl is-enabled" command will

Re: [systemd-devel] SSL handshake error from offlineimap when using systemd to initialize

On Wed, 24 Jan 2018, Yubin Ruan wrote: On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 01:54:36PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: On So, 21.01.18 19:12, Yubin Ruan (ablacktsh...@gmail.com) wrote: Hi, I use offlineimap to synchronize my emails. I want it to do a synchronization at system startup so recently I add a

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl start second.service first.service

On Fri, 12 Jan 2018, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: 12.01.2018 03:47, 林自均 пишет: How about adding an "--order" option to systemctl? With this option, systemctl will sort those units by ordering dependencies before submitting them. And why does it matter? If unit A can be started without unit B, why

Re: [systemd-devel] Default reply to the mailing-list instead of sender

On Tue, 19 Dec 2017, Cecil Westerhof wrote: With most mailing-lists when replying with GMail a reply is default send to the mailing-list, but with this mailing-list it is default send to the sender. Would it be possible to change this? Just use the "Reply all" functionality of your email

Re: [systemd-devel] "bootctl install" on mdadm raid 1 fails

On Sun, 10 Dec 2017, Bjørn Forsman wrote: On 9 December 2017 at 06:56, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: [...] Firmware is unaware of MD RAID and each partition is individually and independently writable by firmware. 1. "Firmware is unaware of MD RAID". I agree. 2. "...

Re: [systemd-devel] How to run forking daemon with systemd in correct way, without errors?

On Thu, 23 Nov 2017, Gena Makhomed wrote: On 23.11.2017 7:45, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote: This is bug in nginx code? And this bug should be fixed in nginx? But "daemon(); write_pidfile();" is common pattern used by many services and even in library functions. It may be common, but not

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl --user user can't restart their own service?

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017, Jeff Solomon wrote: When I run: systemctl --user daemon-reexec I see that the daemon gets a --deserialize flag in it command line on "top" but the PID is not any different. I guess I don't need the PID to change if the process picks up any changes to its unit file. The

Re: [systemd-devel] systemctl --user user can't restart their own service?

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017, Jeff Solomon wrote: Hi, Is it by-design that a user can't restart their own user service? If they aren't a lingering user, they'll get a new systemd instance if they completely log out and back in again. Alternatively, they can restart the running instance with:

  1   2   >