Wouter Verhelst wou...@debian.org writes:
On 26-05-13 15:11, Holger Levsen wrote:
Hi,
On Samstag, 25. Mai 2013, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
For example: after some intense studying, I now fully understand why
declaring a new upstart job C that depends on existing jobs A and B
(start on
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:58:13AM -0700, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
The only way to avoid this (at least at the time I reported the bug),
would have been to recompile mountall to emit events with --no-wait (but
I'm not sure what other unintended consequences that would have had).
Lots of them.
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes:
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 11:58:13AM -0700, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
As I said, there isn't a bug anywhere here. Once you understand what's
going on, this all makes sense. But I don't consider this a very good
design.
Well, I don't think it's a bad design
Hi,
On Samstag, 25. Mai 2013, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
For example: after some intense studying, I now fully understand why
declaring a new upstart job C that depends on existing jobs A and B
(start on job-a-did-its-thing AND job-b-did-its-thing) may prevent the
start of job A (cf
On 26-05-13 15:11, Holger Levsen wrote:
Hi,
On Samstag, 25. Mai 2013, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
For example: after some intense studying, I now fully understand why
declaring a new upstart job C that depends on existing jobs A and B
(start on job-a-did-its-thing AND job-b-did-its-thing) may
❦ 24 mai 2013 12:29 CEST, Dmitrijs Ledkovs x...@debian.org :
The best way to run daemons under upstart is in foreground, then
correct PID is tracked and the complete stdout/stderr is properly
collected and stored in /var/log/upstart/$job.log (even early boot
output).
The best way to run a
Steve Langasek vorlon at debian.org writes:
Sorry you ran into trouble with upstart.
Not a DD, just a happy Debian user, hope you'll excuse me, but on the topic
of Upstart, I have some technical comments on why, surprisingly, I think it
may not be mature enough yet.
A couple of years ago I was
On 05/22/2013 06:19 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 03:39:00PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
On 05/22/2013 04:50 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I went through the various init systems threads again during the last
few days. My understanding of the consensus so
On 23 May 2013 10:37, Ole Laursen o...@hardworking.dk wrote:
Steve Langasek vorlon at debian.org writes:
Sorry you ran into trouble with upstart.
Not a DD, just a happy Debian user, hope you'll excuse me, but on the topic
of Upstart, I have some technical comments on why, surprisingly, I
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:29:27AM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
Blog posts are interesting to read, but at times I'd like to look up
reference manuals which are more than bear minimal man pages. Whilst
systemd ships manpages, the website has either incorrectly formatted
wiki-pages and/or
On 24/05/13 11:29, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
As far as I understand (correct me if I am wrong), systemd instead of
counting/tracking forks uses cgroups to keep track of the started
processes.
systemd uses cgroups to track which processes are part of this
service?, which means the services may be
Dmitrijs Ledkovs xnox at debian.org writes:
Also on technical merits although more philosophically, with Upstart you're
expressing yourself in an event-based DSL rather than writing configuration
files. It's pretty generic. But unfortunately, that means it's also not
entirely straightforward,
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:29:07PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
On 24/05/13 11:29, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
As far as I understand (correct me if I am wrong), systemd instead of
counting/tracking forks uses cgroups to keep track of the started
processes.
systemd uses cgroups to track which
Dmitrijs Ledkovs x...@debian.org writes:
Also on technical merits although more philosophically, with Upstart you're
expressing yourself in an event-based DSL rather than writing configuration
files. It's pretty generic. But unfortunately, that means it's also not
entirely straightforward,
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 03:39:00PM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
On 05/22/2013 04:50 AM, Uoti Urpala wrote:
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I went through the various init systems threads again during the last
few days. My understanding of the consensus so far is the following:
- Both systemd and
On 05/22/2013 06:19 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
I'm skeptical of the value of such a design in place of just using
an initramfs, but the 'friendly-recovery' package in Ubuntu gives
an example of to do this.
live-config-upstart needs the same to be useful. personally i have no
experience with
16 matches
Mail list logo
