Re: [systemd-devel] Is masking an error?
On Tue, 21.01.14 09:33, Holger Schurig (holgerschu...@gmail.com) wrote: > Hi, > > on my systemd v208 + many patches from the Fedora 21 source RPM i get > TWO error messages in my journal when I login as root: > > 09:27:58 systemd-logind[118]: Failed to start unit user@0.service: > Unit user@0.service failed to load: No such file or directory. > 09:27:58 systemd-logind[118]: Failed to start user service: Unit > user@0.service failed to load: No such file or directory. > > But it was my decision as an admin to disable user sessions, by doing > "ln -s /dev/null /etc/systemd/systemd/user@.service". In my case > systemd runs in embedded devices and no one would use use user service > files anyway -> tightly controlled environment. > > So, it would be better to a) only spit one message that this is masked > and b) put that at debug level I'd be willing to merge a patch for this! Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Is masking an error?
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > Am 21.01.2014 09:33, schrieb Holger Schurig: >> on my systemd v208 + many patches from the Fedora 21 source RPM i get >> TWO error messages in my journal when I login as root: >> >> 09:27:58 systemd-logind[118]: Failed to start unit user@0.service: >> Unit user@0.service failed to load: No such file or directory. >> 09:27:58 systemd-logind[118]: Failed to start user service: Unit >> user@0.service failed to load: No such file or directory. > > Since logind explicitly creates a "start" job for user@0.service, this > is an error, since the service does not exist. > systemd could certainly be intelligent enough to notice that template was deliberately masked by admin. That not exactly the same as "service does not exist". ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Is masking an error?
> I'd actually have used user sessions Not sure if "I'd" translate to "I would have actually used". But that is what I meant :-) ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Is masking an error?
Thomas, logind in conjunction with udev's tagging also sets some device ACLs correctly, which I like. I also like that I can have a protection to not reboot my system while a user is active. So I'm not ready to get rid of logind completely. I'd actually have used user sessions if starting a user-dbus (in text mode, not in X) and "systemd-run --user" would have worked with my vanilla v208. But it was a mess, so I solved that entireley differently. For now I have a yucky type=oneshot ExecStart=/bin/true service file in /etc/systemd/system/user@.service. This is very ugly, so I raised the question if announcing masked services as an *ERROR* is really the way to go. Every masking is a system admin decision, after all. ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Is masking an error?
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Thomas Bächler wrote: > So, I'd mask systemd-logind.service and remove pam_systemd.so from the > PAM configuration (I think it's set so that failure is ignored anyway, > but removing it should still be safer). It will detect a lack of systemd-logind and no-op, but its detection method is based on a directory systemd-logind creates on first start each boot. So, the proper way to disable systemd-logind is to mask it and either reboot or prune away the directory. Otherwise, pam_systemd will assume systemd-logind is present *even if it's been stopped*. ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Is masking an error?
Am 21.01.2014 09:33, schrieb Holger Schurig: > on my systemd v208 + many patches from the Fedora 21 source RPM i get > TWO error messages in my journal when I login as root: > > 09:27:58 systemd-logind[118]: Failed to start unit user@0.service: > Unit user@0.service failed to load: No such file or directory. > 09:27:58 systemd-logind[118]: Failed to start user service: Unit > user@0.service failed to load: No such file or directory. Since logind explicitly creates a "start" job for user@0.service, this is an error, since the service does not exist. > But it was my decision as an admin to disable user sessions, by doing > "ln -s /dev/null /etc/systemd/systemd/user@.service". In my case > systemd runs in embedded devices and no one would use use user service > files anyway -> tightly controlled environment. In such a case, wouldn't it be better to disable logind entirely (or even trim down the systemd installation to not include it)? Since you are not interested in user sessions, you need no resource control for user sessions. You don't need suspend/hibernate/shutdown/reboot for users either. Nor do you need configuration of device ACLs. So, I'd mask systemd-logind.service and remove pam_systemd.so from the PAM configuration (I think it's set so that failure is ignored anyway, but removing it should still be safer). signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
[systemd-devel] Is masking an error?
Hi, on my systemd v208 + many patches from the Fedora 21 source RPM i get TWO error messages in my journal when I login as root: 09:27:58 systemd-logind[118]: Failed to start unit user@0.service: Unit user@0.service failed to load: No such file or directory. 09:27:58 systemd-logind[118]: Failed to start user service: Unit user@0.service failed to load: No such file or directory. But it was my decision as an admin to disable user sessions, by doing "ln -s /dev/null /etc/systemd/systemd/user@.service". In my case systemd runs in embedded devices and no one would use use user service files anyway -> tightly controlled environment. So, it would be better to a) only spit one message that this is masked and b) put that at debug level ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
