On Sat, 2023-12-16 at 15:31 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Fr, 15.12.23 22:17, chandler (s...@riseup.net) wrote:
> > Other items have different situations, like tmp.mount exists at
> > /usr/share/systemd/tmp.mount but isn't an enabled unit or anything, if I
> > try to enable or unmask
On Sat, 2023-04-01 at 06:16 +1100, Michael Chapman wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2023, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> [...]
> > Presumably your system mmaps ELF binaries, VM images, and similar
> > stuff into memory. if you don't allow anonymous memory to backed out
> > onto swap, then you basically
On Mon, 2023-02-20 at 12:22 +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
> I see. So basically you have to keep the service running across the
> upgrade and then wait for it to shut down due to inactivity, then be
> restarted by systemd to make the update apply. Or alternatively you
> could make the app detect that
On Mon, 2021-11-08 at 12:05 +0100, Sean Nyekjaer wrote:
> 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
On Fri, 2021-06-18 at 19:48 +0200, Norbert Lange wrote:
> If systemd assumes the whole /usr drive to be static and has no way to
> dynamically reload and "retarget"
> (adding new wants/requires dependencies to starting/started targets)
> then I guess that's the end of it.
Systemd does not
On Thu, 2021-06-10 at 10:49 +, paul.niel...@fujitsu.com wrote:
> So, anyways, I don't see the difference between the units that causes the
> different behavior. Furthermore, from my point of view (as a user) it
> contradicts the description of the Timestamp values in the man page somehow,
>
On Wed, 2021-05-19 at 02:19 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> So this is where I guess I'm missing something. To be able to make
> sense of the coredumps there are two things that might end up being
> relevant, backtraces and source code. systemd-coredump might already
I understood Luca's point to be
On Mon, 2021-02-08 at 11:27 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> this is *not* what systemd-sockets are for
> they are for service is started at the first connect
This is wrong. Socket units are useful completely independently of
whether the unit is started on demand, and it's a good idea to use them
On Sat, 2020-11-14 at 09:31 +, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> # journalctl --disk-usage
> Archived and active journals take up 320.0M in the file system.
>
> # journalctl > alllogs
> # ls -lh alllogs
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 27M Nov 14 09:24 alllogs
The journal stores a lot of metadata for each log
On Mon, 2020-08-10 at 20:19 +0100, Dave Howorth wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Aug 2020 20:21:51 +0200
> Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > i.e. it unifies how system programs are invoked, and that's a good
> > thing. it turns time-based activation into "just another type of
> > activation".
>
> Most of that
On Sun, 2020-07-12 at 17:13 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> 12.07.2020 16:21, Amish пишет:
> > I have a timer file like this:
> >
> > [Unit]
> > Description=Foo
> > After=multi-user.target
> >
> > [Timer]
> > OnCalendar=*:0/5
> > Persistent=false
> >
> > [Install]
> > WantedBy=timers.target
On Thu, 2020-06-11 at 11:39 -0400, Bruce A. Johnson wrote:
> I'm trying to figure out how to resolve these errors that are preventing
> one of my services from running, and I'm kind of at a loss. Systemd is
> stumbling over a read-write directory that needs to be created for the
> service.
>
> >
On Thu, 2020-04-30 at 22:18 +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> waiting for the stop request initiated previously to finish). Even if
> you use fail as the job mode, the error you get back is "Transaction
> is destructive" or so, not this.
IIRC the patch he mentioned in his mail was one that
On Mon, 2020-04-27 at 11:40 +0100, Mark Bannister wrote:
> I'm not sure where to begin to troubleshoot the problem. The systemd
> error is occurring sporadically and I haven't yet found a way to
> reproduce it. I also can't say I actually understand the error
> message or what I'm supposed to do
On Mon, 2020-02-03 at 19:01 +, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> I see that systemd pid1 manager is available on the system DBus.
>
> But when/how does it connect to it?
unit_notify() calls manager_recheck_dbus(), which connects to the bus
if dbus.service is running.
On Mon, 2019-11-25 at 13:22 +, mikko.rap...@bmw.de wrote:
> Maybe you need Wants instead of Requires in the service file.
I don't think so. "Wants" is in the opposite direction - it explicitly
does not require the other unit to successfully start. Even with
"After=" specified, it just makes
On Mon, 2019-11-25 at 15:19 +0200, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:
> > Requires=xyz.service
> >
> > produces no complaint and starts the service even if there is no xyz.service
> > Is this the normal behavior or can I configure systemd to throw an error in
> > this case?
>
> The docs say you can get
On Wed, 2019-11-13 at 10:24 -0500, John wrote:
> I am using systemd-nspawn to compile in a clean environment. My
> distcc cluster happily accepts requests from the container's build,
> but the monitoring utility, distccmon-text, shows no output. I invoked
> it defining the DISTCC_DIR variable to
On Fri, 2019-09-27 at 17:12 +0200, Mirza Krak wrote:
> This is what the systemd-growfs@.service looks like:
>
> # Automatically generated by systemd-fstab-generator
> [Unit]
> Description=Grow File System on %f
> Documentation=man:systemd-growfs@.service(8)
> DefaultDependencies=no
>
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
> definitely fixed the problem. All of these experiments are just
> circumstantial evidence.
On Tue, 2019-07-30 at 14:56 -0400, Brian Reichert wrote:
> I see, between 13:49:30 and 13:50:01, I see 25 'successful' calls
> for close(), e.g.:
>
> 13:50:01 close(19) = 0
>
> Followed by getsockopt(), and a received message on the supposedly-closed
> file descriptor:
On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 21:52 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> # df -h
> ...
> /dev/mapper/live-rw 6.4G 5.7G 648M 91% /
>
> And in the log:
> 47,19636,16754831,-;systemd-journald[905]: Fixed min_use=1.0M
> max_use=648.7M max_size=81.0M min_size=512.0K keep_free=973.1M
> n_max_files=100
>
> Why is
On Mon, 2019-07-15 at 14:32 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> So far nothing I've tried gets me access to information that would
> give a hint why systemd-journald thinks there's no free space and yet
> it still decides to create a single 8MB system journal, which then
> almost immediately gets
On Wed, 2019-07-03 at 23:51 +, Sam Gilson wrote:
> My hypothesis is that is that our service loops for a long time (30
> min usually) while waiting for a new DHCP lease to come in, and once
> that is completed, a time sync w/NTP occurs which causes the
> ExecMainStartTimestamp to be rewritten.
On Mon, 2019-05-20 at 11:56 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> about that though). Using ExecStartPre= for a syntax checker appears
> pretty pointless to me, as yes, you just end up doing the same work
> twice, and you might as well have the ExecStart= fail rather than the
> ExecStartPre=, there's
On Sat, 2019-02-02 at 15:03 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
> > Have you enabled a.service?
> >
> No... I did not think I had to... I figured
> when b.service was started, a.service would be
> run regardless of being enabled or disabled.
>
> Is that not the case?
So you just have the file for
On Sun, 2019-01-20 at 00:34 +, Jonathon Kowalski wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 5:05 PM Uoti Urpala wrote:
> > I think you're wrong here. It makes perfect sense that if unit A has
> > Requires= for another unit, stopping that required unit which A can't
> > work wi
On Sat, 2019-01-19 at 15:54 +, Jonathon Kowalski wrote:
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/1154 which is similar in
> nature convinces me that systemd currently conflates two many
> properties in the same dependency. The second bug in particular would
> not happen if there was a
On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 19:32 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am Do., 30. Aug. 2018 um 18:56 Uhr schrieb Uoti Urpala
> :
> > Keeping code using an up-to-date dependency disabled because other
> > packages haven't been updated seems backwards...
> I don't want to use systemd as a
On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 16:39 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am Do., 30. Aug. 2018 um 15:50 Uhr schrieb Jérémy Rosen <
> jeremy.ro...@smile.fr>:
> > I *think* that it's deactivated in debian because journalctl is a
> > core package and debian doesn't want to pull the regex library into
> > it's
On Wed, 2018-08-29 at 19:49 +0200, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> There are a lot of ways you can select the output you get from
> journalctl, but it seems you cannot select on the message itself.
> That is why I need to do something like:
> journalctl | grep 'Database is locked'
>
> Is this true,
On Fri, 2018-08-24 at 14:52 +0300, David Weinehall wrote:
> The second time-related issue pertains to journalctl.
>
> It seems that journalctl logs (or at least displays) events in date/clock
> order, not in
> sequence order. While this is definitely useful when trying to correlate
> different
On Wed, 2018-05-09 at 17:39 +0200, Michal Sekletar wrote:
> I was thinking that in addition to better log messages we could
> generate dot graph of the cycle and dump it to journal as a custom
> field. So people can then turn it into the picture and get a better
> understanding of the cycle. Do
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 12:41 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> This last log lines indicates journald wasn't scheduled for a long
> time which caused the watchdog to hit and journald was
> aborted. Consider increasing the watchdog timeout if your system is
> indeed that loaded and that's is
On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 17:24 +, Boyce, Kevin P [US] (AS) wrote:
> Does anyone know if there is a way to create a service unit that
> pauses early on in the boot sequence and asks the user a question?
> A reply would be required via keyboard.
There is no separate "pause" feature. You can likely
On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 15:40 +0100, Franck Bui wrote:
> Sorry I was probably not clear: by "do the equivalent of "mount -a"
> during boot only" I meant to mount fs listed in fstab (without
> "noauto") the way it's done currently by systemd during boot.
>
> During boot there shouldn't be any
On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 15:34 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 11.01.2018 um 15:25 schrieb Uoti Urpala:
> > I'd guess this is due to systemctl starting each listed unit
> > independently rather than as a single transaction. Thus, the second
> > version first starts s
On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 10:59 +, 林自均 wrote:
> I have 2 service unist: first.service and second.service. I
> configured "After=first.service" in second.service. Both services are
> "Type=oneshot".
>
> If I execute:
>
> # systemctl start first.service second.service
>
> The ordering dependency
On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 20:34 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Well, the idea is that /* */ is used for explanatory comments and //
> is left for local, temporary, non-commitable stuff.
>
> i.e. if you are testing some stuff, and want to comment out some bits
> briefly, use //, but if you add
On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 10:35 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Do, 14.12.17 03:56, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
> > BTW current sd_journal_next() documentation claims "The journal is
> > strictly ordered by reception time, and hence advancing to the next
On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 13:24 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
>
> On 12/14/2017 12:48 PM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 12:05 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
> > > +Wants=rpcbind.socket rpcbind.target
> > > +After=rpcbind.socket rpcbind.target
> >
>
On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 12:05 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
> According to systemd.special(7) manpage:
>
> rpcbind.target
> The portmapper/rpcbind pulls in this target and orders itself
> before it, to indicate its availability. systemd automatically adds
> dependencies of type After= for this
On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 18:40 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mi, 13.12.17 00:43, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
> > correct position, so I don't see why the monotonicity discard would be
> > needed for that case either?
>
> I figure you are right.
>
&
On Tue, 2017-12-12 at 17:09 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mo, 11.12.17 00:36, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
> > consider a clear bug: there's code in next_beyond_location() which
> > skips the next entry in a file if it's not in the expected direction
> &
The code that tries to determine which of two journal entries is
"earlier" (similar logic in journal_file_comparare_locations() and
compare_with_location()) does this by trying different progressively
less reliable ways to compare - first by seqnum if seqnum id matches,
then by monotonic time if
On Sat, 2017-11-25 at 12:08 +0700, Bao Nguyen wrote:
> [ 41.154231] systemd[1]: nss-lookup.target: Dependency
> Before=nss-lookup.target dropped
> [ 41.297229] systemd[1]: sockets.target: Found ordering cycle on
> sockets.target/start
> [ 41.297236] systemd[1]: sockets.target: Found
Resend with correct list address
On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 12:00 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 11.07.17 12:55, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
> > Are you sure about those "Debian only" and "will be 'fixed'" parts? The
> > Debian patch seem
On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 09:35 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Normally it's dead cheap to check that, it's just reading and
> comparing one memory location. It's a pitty that this isn't the case
> currently on Debian, but as it appears this is an oversight on their
> side, and I am sure it will
On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 17:14 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 06:03:37PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> > I'm not sure where you get that from. The usual interpretation is that
> > linking to a GPLed library means the linked work must be GPL as well.
>
> I
On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 22:00 +0300, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> compiled code, or copy relocations copying arbitrary amounts of data
> into an executable. It seems pretty clear that this can be considered a
Rereading that, copy relocations are actually not that good an example
since the copying no
On Tue, 2017-05-30 at 18:07 +, Moravec, Stanislav (ERT) wrote:
> OK. Understood, thanks much!
> We'll try to follow up on using some parent process (xinetd or something like
> that).
BTW your problem description wasn't very clear. Is your specific
problem case about socket activation of
On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 13:05 +1300, Sergei Franco wrote:
>
> The official ubuntu fix does not resolve the hang.
> The problem is that the unattended-upgrades script relies on /var/run
> being mounted, if the /var/ is a separate filesystem it gets
> unmounted and thus hanging the script (where it
On Tue, 2016-11-01 at 20:01 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> 01.11.2016 18:47, Lennart Poettering пишет:
> > DefaultDependencies=no now, which means you run in early boot, and
> > then things become more complex, as /var is not around fully yet.
> >
>
> Unit file had RequiresMountsFor=/var/run.
On Wed, 2016-11-02 at 06:16 +0100, Kai Krakow wrote:
> Do you still use DefaultDependencies=no?
>
> Then /usr is probably not available that early (now that it can start
> much earlier due to /run being available). What's the exercise of
> disabling default dependencies anyway?
/usr is always
On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 17:51 +, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> Orion Poplawski cora.nwra.com> writes:
> >
> > # systemctl restart firewalld
> > Failed to restart firewalld.service: Transaction contains
> > conflicting jobs
> > 'restart' and 'stop' for fail2ban.service. Probably contradicting
> >
On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 13:24 +0200, Jan Synáček wrote:
192.168.122.1:/srv/nfs /mnt/nfs nfs defaults 0 0
/var/tmp/test.iso /mnt/nfs/content iso9660 loop,ro 0 0
Notice the last two lines. There is an NFS mount mounted to /mnt/nfs
and
an ISO filesystem mounted into /mnt/nfs/content, which
On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 01:26 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 19.05.15 00:55, Lennart Poettering (lenn...@poettering.net) wrote:
On Thu, 14.05.15 21:23, Evert (evert.gen...@planet.nl) wrote:
According to the systemd documentation, Requisite disallows starting a
unit unless the
On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 14:06 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 19.05.15 14:15, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
As for Evert's original problem, I think it's that RESTART is propagated
to all RequiredBy units unconditionally - even if those are currently
stopped
On Mon, 2015-04-27 at 18:07 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 04.02.15 23:48, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
If you mean something like systemctl restart --no-block
mydaemon-convert-config.service; systemctl reload mydaemon.service, I
don't see why you'd ever /expect
On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 10:24 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 1:56 AM, Kai Krakow hurikha...@gmail.com wrote:
The point is: Let's just find out why the intuitive way to solve the OPs
problem doesn't work out and find the right solution. Let's face it: Trying
to use
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 18:41 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Michael Biebl mbi...@gmail.com wrote:
The summary of my reply was What you probably want, is hook into
basic.target or sysinit.target, use DefaultDependencies=no, and
specify the
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 14:27 +0100, Christoph Pleger wrote:
Then, I still do not understand why my definition of a new target did
not
work. What is the difference between multi-user.target waiting for
basic.target on the one hand and new.target waiting for basic.target and
On Wed, 2015-02-04 at 23:48 +0200, Uoti Urpala wrote:
On Wed, 2015-02-04 at 21:57 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
currently being started. You are suggesting that the reload can
suppressed when a start is already enqueued, but that's really not the
case, because you first have to run m-c
On Wed, 2015-02-04 at 15:06 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
Lennart Poettering [2015-02-04 13:42 +0100]:
Well, but their enablement status so far is not ignored. i.e. if you
drop in a unit file, as well as a sysv script, and the latter is
enabled, but the former not, then systemd currently reads
On Wed, 2015-02-04 at 19:36 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 04.02.15 20:19, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
You're missing an essential point here: there's a distinction between
skipping reloads for services which have not not been dispatched, and
skipping reloads
On Wed, 2015-02-04 at 22:02 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 04.02.15 21:26, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
Isn't this change also relevant to the creation of .wants symlinks, and
avoiding generating .wants links from the wrong targets?
As in, the case where you
On Wed, 2015-02-04 at 21:57 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
OK, let's try this again, with an example:
a) you have one service mydaemon.service
b) you have a preparation service called
mydaemon-convert-config.service that takes config from somewhere,
converts it into a suitable
On Mon, 2014-12-22 at 00:17 -0800, Shawn Paul Landden wrote:
There is alot of cleanup that will have to happen to turn on
-fstrict-aliasing, but I think our code should be correct to the rule.
-uint8_t buffer[INOTIFY_EVENT_MAX] _alignas_(struct
inotify_event);
+
On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 02:39 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 02.12.14 20:02, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
On Tue, 2014-12-02 at 01:51 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 18.11.14 16:09, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
WantedBy=multi-user.target
On Tue, 2014-12-02 at 01:51 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 18.11.14 16:09, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
2014-11-18 15:59 GMT+01:00 Colin Guthrie gm...@colin.guthr.ie:
For the avoidance of doubt, I believe that running systemctl preset
should only ever happen on
[Resending to the list, as it seems recipients were wrong in the first attempt]
The discussion on this died down. I'm bringing this back up as it's IMO
quite a significant problem.
To recap:
The core issue is that if a start job is queued for foo.service,
systemctl reload foo.service blocks
On Wed, 2014-10-22 at 02:13 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
With that I perceive starts an answer on a technical matter ends with what I
received as a dire personal attack: I.e. calling me names.
I think it was a mostly justified criticism of your posting style here.
I will make an effort
On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 14:15 -0400, Rob Owens wrote:
My question really isn't why are the Debian dependencies the way they are.
I understand that. I was trying to highlight the strange situation of a
desktop application requiring a particular init system. I *think* this is a
result of the
On Sat, 2014-10-04 at 21:24 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Environment=X='Y' Z
ExecStart=/bin/echo $X ${X}
results in echo[31266]: Y Z 'Y' Z
i.e., $X not only splits at whitespace, as documented, but also strips quotes.
Is this by design, or is it an implementation accident?
On Sun, 2014-09-21 at 15:31 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Did you ever ask yourself why your project provokes that amount of resistance
and polarity? Did you ever ask yourself whether this really is just
resistance
against anything new from people who just do not like new or whether it
On Fri, 2014-08-15 at 12:50 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Fri, 15.08.14 05:09, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
Before this commit systemctl reload on an inactive unit with a queued
start job would block until the unit had started if the unit supported
reload
On Fri, 2014-08-15 at 22:22 +0400, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
В Fri, 15 Aug 2014 20:25:57 +0300
Uoti Urpala uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi пишет:
The problem with this is that it's common for things updating
configuration to be separate from things using the daemon. If something
changes
On Fri, 2014-08-15 at 01:59 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 16.07.14 04:15, Jon Severinsson (j...@severinsson.net) wrote:
Before this commit systemctl reload on an inactive unit with a queued
start job would block until the unit had started if the unit supported
reload, but return
On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 20:22 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
]] Lennart Poettering
(Also I see little point in /tmp not being a tmpfs anyway. If you want a
lot of space there, then use swap -- of which you can have up to 2G even
on 32bit systems. tmpfs on on swap has the great benefit that
On Sat, 2014-07-05 at 20:56 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
This is useful to test the behaviour of the compressor for various buffer
sizes.
Time is limited to a minute per compression, since otherwise, when LZ4
takes more than a second which is necessary to reduce the noise, XZ
On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 12:00 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
What about a new fs_passno value of -1 that means use default for this file
system type, and systemd spawns fsck based on the recommendation of that
file system's devs?
How should the file system devs communicate their current
On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 12:38 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Sat, 28.06.14 18:15, Moviuro (movi...@gmail.com) wrote:
An idea would be to use units with many '@' or have systemd interpret the
string between '@' and '.service' as '@'-separated values (e.g.
On Fri, 2014-06-27 at 16:17 +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Hm, I did some testing, and I'm not convinced that XZ is the right
compressor for the job.
First I generated a 1GB coredump of Python with random patterns. It
takes 20 minutes (!) to compress with XZ 9, and 11.5 min with
6d575f18437dd5bfd02c4736dbd3e6a8a1286ab2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Uoti Urpala uau@glyph.nonexistent.invalid
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 08:14:22 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] core/transaction: fix cycle break attempts outside
transaction
transaction_verify_order_one() considers jobs/units outside current
On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 15:16 +0200, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog wrote:
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote:
Wouldn't this be solved by telling the kernel to schedule the starting
services with high latency (or whatever the terminology is), i.e.,
give each of them a
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 06:47 +0100, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Applied, though I changed the fix to simply print a newline.
Just seems nicer this way.
OK, though I would have added a return false; if doing it that way -
now it somewhat non-obviously depends on the code below being a
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 03:00 +0200, Uoti Urpala wrote:
If a message had zero length, journalctl would print no newline, and
Ping. There's been no reply to the above message, but it's a simple
change and I don't think the bug is one people would want to leave
unfixed
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 02:03 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Thu, 20.02.14 01:21, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
Even if there can be reasonable style disagreements about exactly where
to use mixed declarations, at least some uses of them are certainly
beneficial. It's only
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 17:53 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Zbigniew suggest we should drop -Wdeclaration-after-statement. I am not
convinced that that would be a good idea since generally declarations
after statements are an abomination, and we should avoid them, and it is
nice if gcc warns
calculation for general C objects (could theoretically wrap
around to start of address space etc). Probably won't be called with
such objects in practice.
From 4775218f59474165395f7868dfbf9e6b831f5fee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Uoti Urpala uau@glyph.nonexistent.invalid
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014
On Mon, 2014-01-27 at 19:53 +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
Can we expect open(O_TMPFILE) to fail on kernels which do not support
it?
Yeah, but what happens for a /tmp/does-not-exist request? :)
#define O_TMPFILE (__O_TMPFILE | O_DIRECTORY)
the O_DIRECTORY part should make it fail.
91 matches
Mail list logo
