Re: [systemd-devel] [PATCH] static-nodes: move creation of static nodes from udevd to tmpfiles
On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote: Hi Umut, On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Umut Tezduyar u...@tezduyar.com wrote: Just a suggestion, can kmod-static-nodes.service be merged to systemd-static-nodes.service and have 2 ExecStartPre= as: ExecStartPre=/usr/bin/mkdir -p /run/tmpfiles.d ExecStartPre=/usr/bin/kmod static-nodes --format=tmpfiles --output=/run/tmpfiles.d/kmod.conf Could do, but what would be the benefit? I have no strong objection, except that in principle they are independent. Hi. I thought they serve for the same purpose. One generates device node information, other one creates the devices. I have no objection either but I thought we have documentation etc ready for systemd-static-nodes.service. If you are keeping kmod-static-nodes.service, maybe we should consider the configure flag for tmpfile support. If tmpfile support is not enabled, generated device file means nothing, I guess.. Thanks. -t ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] [PATCH] static-nodes: move creation of static nodes from udevd to tmpfiles
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Umut Tezduyar u...@tezduyar.com wrote: Hi. I thought they serve for the same purpose. One generates device node information, other one creates the devices. I have no objection either but I thought we have documentation etc ready for systemd-static-nodes.service. I pushed this as is, we could change it in the future. If you are keeping kmod-static-nodes.service, maybe we should consider the configure flag for tmpfile support. If tmpfile support is not enabled, generated device file means nothing, I guess.. Good point, changed that before pushing. Thanks, Tom ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
[systemd-devel] [PATCH] static-nodes: move creation of static nodes from udevd to tmpfiles
Hi guys, Any objections to pushing this patch (attached as I'm having problems with sendmail): As of kmod v14 (currently in Fedora Rawhide and Arch Linux [core]), it is possible to export the static node information from /lib/modules/`uname -r`/modules.devname in tmpfiles.d(5) format. Use this functionality to let systemd-tmpfilesd create the static device nodes at boot, and drop the functionality from systemd-udevd. Cheers, Tom static-nodes.patch Description: Binary data ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] [PATCH] static-nodes: move creation of static nodes from udevd to tmpfiles
Hi Tom, Just a suggestion, can kmod-static-nodes.service be merged to systemd-static-nodes.service and have 2 ExecStartPre= as: ExecStartPre=/usr/bin/mkdir -p /run/tmpfiles.d ExecStartPre=/usr/bin/kmod static-nodes --format=tmpfiles --output=/run/tmpfiles.d/kmod.conf On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Tom Gundersen t...@jklm.no wrote: Hi guys, Any objections to pushing this patch (attached as I'm having problems with sendmail): As of kmod v14 (currently in Fedora Rawhide and Arch Linux [core]), it is possible to export the static node information from /lib/modules/`uname -r`/modules.devname in tmpfiles.d(5) format. Use this functionality to let systemd-tmpfilesd create the static device nodes at boot, and drop the functionality from systemd-udevd. Cheers, Tom ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] [PATCH] static-nodes: move creation of static nodes from udevd to tmpfiles
Hi Umut, On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Umut Tezduyar u...@tezduyar.com wrote: Just a suggestion, can kmod-static-nodes.service be merged to systemd-static-nodes.service and have 2 ExecStartPre= as: ExecStartPre=/usr/bin/mkdir -p /run/tmpfiles.d ExecStartPre=/usr/bin/kmod static-nodes --format=tmpfiles --output=/run/tmpfiles.d/kmod.conf Could do, but what would be the benefit? I have no strong objection, except that in principle they are independent. -t ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
