On Fri, 13.02.15 09:49, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote:
> В Wed, 11 Feb 2015 21:19:16 +0100
> Lennart Poettering пишет:
>
> > >
> > > But the problem is not limited to legacy initscripts. It makes it
> > > generally unsafe to have aliases via symlinks. Aliases were always
> > > me
В Wed, 11 Feb 2015 21:19:16 +0100
Lennart Poettering пишет:
> >
> > But the problem is not limited to legacy initscripts. It makes it
> > generally unsafe to have aliases via symlinks. Aliases were always
> > meant "for compatibility" but this problems exactly means that
> > "compatibility" is b
On 02/12/2015 04:38 AM, Michael Biebl wrote:
2015-02-11 20:12 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
So, I have discussed this with Kay, David, Daniel, and co. And we
kinda came to the conclusion that we might as well just drop the
configurability where runlevel3-5.target point to. If we drop that, we
On Thu, 12.02.15 05:38, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
> 2015-02-11 20:12 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
> > So, I have discussed this with Kay, David, Daniel, and co. And we
> > kinda came to the conclusion that we might as well just drop the
> > configurability where runlevel3-5.target
2015-02-11 20:12 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
> So, I have discussed this with Kay, David, Daniel, and co. And we
> kinda came to the conclusion that we might as well just drop the
> configurability where runlevel3-5.target point to. If we drop that, we
Do you mean runlevel2-5, or is runlevel2 e
On Wed, 11.02.15 23:10, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote:
> В Wed, 11 Feb 2015 20:12:35 +0100
> Lennart Poettering пишет:
>
> > On Thu, 05.02.15 01:07, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > Just want to know why he didn't considered pushing this pat
В Wed, 11 Feb 2015 20:12:35 +0100
Lennart Poettering пишет:
> On Thu, 05.02.15 01:07, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
>
> > > Just want to know why he didn't considered pushing this patch upstream.
> > > Apparently already two distros patch this downstream, so having a fix
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 08:12:35PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 05.02.15 01:07, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
>
> > > Just want to know why he didn't considered pushing this patch upstream.
> > > Apparently already two distros patch this downstream, so having
On Thu, 05.02.15 01:07, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
> > Just want to know why he didn't considered pushing this patch upstream.
> > Apparently already two distros patch this downstream, so having a fix
> > upstream would imho make sense.
>
> Because it was just a hack :)
On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 09:12:32AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> В Wed, 4 Feb 2015 01:29:11 +0100
> Lennart Poettering пишет:
>
> > On Thu, 25.12.14 08:37, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> > > This looks like fallout of moving to generators for sysv units. Before
> > > syst
В Wed, 4 Feb 2015 01:29:11 +0100
Lennart Poettering пишет:
> On Thu, 25.12.14 08:37, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > This looks like fallout of moving to generators for sysv units. Before
> > systemd added dependencies on runlevelX.target directly to units built
> > from init
On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 09:53:20PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> [grr, accidentally dropped the mailing list on my previous reply]
>
> 2015-02-04 21:48 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
> > On Wed, 04.02.15 21:15, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >> 2015-02-04 2:12 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poet
[grr, accidentally dropped the mailing list on my previous reply]
2015-02-04 21:48 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
> On Wed, 04.02.15 21:15, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> 2015-02-04 2:12 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
>> > On Wed, 04.02.15 02:05, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrot
On Wed, 04.02.15 02:05, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
> 2015-02-04 1:54 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
> > On Wed, 04.02.15 01:52, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >> Is this the same issue as
> >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1002806#c20 ?
> >
> > Feels like it.
2015-02-04 1:54 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
> On Wed, 04.02.15 01:52, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> Is this the same issue as
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1002806#c20 ?
>
> Feels like it.
>
> It's not clear to me though why the bug was closed, i.e. what fix was
> a
On Wed, 04.02.15 01:52, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
> 2015-02-04 1:29 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
> > On Thu, 25.12.14 08:37, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >> This looks like fallout of moving to generators for sysv units. Before
> >> systemd added dependencies
2015-02-04 1:29 GMT+01:00 Lennart Poettering :
> On Thu, 25.12.14 08:37, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> This looks like fallout of moving to generators for sysv units. Before
>> systemd added dependencies on runlevelX.target directly to units built
>> from initscripts. This forc
On Thu, 25.12.14 08:37, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote:
> This looks like fallout of moving to generators for sysv units. Before
> systemd added dependencies on runlevelX.target directly to units built
> from initscripts. This forced runlevelX.target resolution and
> everything was O
Отправлено с iPhone
> 11 дек. 2014 г., в 15:27, Francis Moreau написал(а):
>
>> On 12/10/2014 10:19 AM, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>>> On 12/10/2014 07:23 AM, Ivan Shapovalov wrote:
On Tuesday 09 December 2014 at 17:25:48, Francis Moreau wrote:
Hello Lennart,
В Wed, 10 Dec 2014 09:23:16 +0300
Ivan Shapovalov пишет:
> On Tuesday 09 December 2014 at 17:25:48, Francis Moreau wrote:
> > Hello Lennart,
> >
> > Thanks for answering !
> >
> > On 12/09/2014 02:10 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > On Tue, 09.12.14 11:19, Francis Moreau (francis.m..
On 12/10/2014 10:19 AM, Francis Moreau wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 12/10/2014 07:23 AM, Ivan Shapovalov wrote:
>> On Tuesday 09 December 2014 at 17:25:48, Francis Moreau wrote:
>>> Hello Lennart,
>>>
>>> Thanks for answering !
>>>
>>> On 12/09/2014 02:10 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue
Hello,
On 12/10/2014 07:23 AM, Ivan Shapovalov wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 December 2014 at 17:25:48, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> Hello Lennart,
>>
>> Thanks for answering !
>>
>> On 12/09/2014 02:10 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>> On Tue, 09.12.14 11:19, Francis Moreau (francis.m...@gmail.com)
On Tuesday 09 December 2014 at 17:25:48, Francis Moreau wrote:
> Hello Lennart,
>
> Thanks for answering !
>
> On 12/09/2014 02:10 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Tue, 09.12.14 11:19, Francis Moreau (francis.m...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I've a very weird behaviour with
Hello Lennart,
Thanks for answering !
On 12/09/2014 02:10 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 09.12.14 11:19, Francis Moreau (francis.m...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've a very weird behaviour with systemd 217:
>>
>> # systemctl show -p Wants multi-user.target | grep network.servic
On Tue, 09.12.14 11:19, Francis Moreau (francis.m...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've a very weird behaviour with systemd 217:
>
> # systemctl show -p Wants multi-user.target | grep network.service
> # systemctl show -p Wants runlevel3.target | grep network.service
> Wants= ... network.servic
Hello,
I've a very weird behaviour with systemd 217:
# systemctl show -p Wants multi-user.target | grep network.service
# systemctl show -p Wants runlevel3.target | grep network.service
Wants= ... network.service ...
# systemctl show -p Wants multi-user.target | grep network.service
Wants=... net
26 matches
Mail list logo
