[systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?

2019-07-09 Thread Ulrich Windl
>>> Zbigniew Jedrzejewski-Szmek schrieb am 09.07.2019 um 10:05 in Nachricht <20190709080527.gk17...@in.waw.pl>: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 08:49:32AM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> Hi! >> >> It seems "‑‑state=failed" is being ignored silently for "systemctl status" (in > version 228). Is this by

Re: [systemd-devel] Antw: Re: Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?

2019-07-09 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 10:23:47AM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> Zbigniew Jedrzejewski-Szmek schrieb am 09.07.2019 um > 10:05 > in Nachricht <20190709080527.gk17...@in.waw.pl>: > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 08:49:32AM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >> It seems "‑‑state=failed" is

Re: [systemd-devel] Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?

2019-07-09 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 08:49:32AM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: > Hi! > > It seems "--state=failed" is being ignored silently for "systemctl status" > (in version 228). Is this by design? Nope. In 242-1092+ it seems to work fine. Zbyszek ___

[systemd-devel] Recent changes to 99-default.link and udevadm

2019-07-09 Thread Conrad Hoffmann
Hi all, I have a question about https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/84ea567eb4326eb970a33188649fde6bea2a0d4e I am running systemd 242 (242.32-2-arch) which seems to inlude these changes. Basically, I suspect that, related to that change, running `udevadm test-builtin net_setup_link` fails

Re: [systemd-devel] Recent changes to 99-default.link and udevadm

2019-07-09 Thread Conrad Hoffmann
PS: > and the command fails. What I find curious is that the commit introduces > a message stating that the match section should be added using "Name=*" > (which I verified would also work for me) but instead adds a > "OriginalName=*" match. Okay, just realized that this is not actually true, I

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

2019-07-09 Thread Brian Reichert
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 11:21:13AM +0100, systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org wrote: > Hi Brian > > I feel embarrassed at having recommended you to join the systemd-devel > list :( I don't understand why nobody is responding to you, and I'm not > qualified to help! I appreciate the private

[systemd-devel] Is "systemctl status --state=failed" expected to fail silently?

2019-07-09 Thread Ulrich Windl
Hi! It seems "--state=failed" is being ignored silently for "systemctl status" (in version 228). Is this by design? Regards, Ulrich ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org

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

2019-07-09 Thread Mantas Mikulėnas
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 4:28 PM Brian Reichert wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 11:21:13AM +0100, > systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org wrote: > > Hi Brian > > > > I feel embarrassed at having recommended you to join the systemd-devel > > list :( I don't understand why nobody is responding to

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

2019-07-09 Thread Brian Reichert
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 06:20:02PM +0100, systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org wrote: > > Posting private messages to a public list is generally considered very > RUDE. I agree, and I apologize. The message I received, and replied to, did not come from a private email address; it apparently