Adds arguments --root= --runtime --no-legend.
Adds verbs link mask unmask reenable list-unit-files.
Also uses list-unit-files to make nicer enable and disable completions.
Rebased due to changes in systemctl.
---
src/systemctl-bash-completion.sh | 61 +++--
1 fil
This script is straightforward and should give proper completions for
all of systemd-loginctl's verbs.
---
src/systemctl-bash-completion.sh | 83 ++
1 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/systemctl-bash-completion.sh b/src/systemct
---
Makefile.am|2 +-
...sh-completion.sh => systemd-bash-completion.sh} |0
2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
rename src/{systemctl-bash-completion.sh => systemd-bash-completion.sh} (100%)
diff --git a/Makefile.am b/Makefile.am
inde
Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
>
> > You really don't want to fsck a tmpfs, even if passno is non-null (it
> > was causing many issue, forcing system to go to emergency).
>
> Hmm, I wonder i
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
>> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
>>
>> > You really don't want to fsck a tmpfs, even if passno is non-null (it
>> > was causing many issu
On Wed, 02.11.11 12:15, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> >> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
> >>
> >> > You really don't
On Wed, 02.11.11 10:48, Ran Benita (ran...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Adds arguments --root= --runtime --no-legend.
> Adds verbs link mask unmask reenable list-unit-files.
> Also uses list-unit-files to make nicer enable and disable completions.
>
> Rebased due to changes in systemctl.
Thanks a ton! Al
On Mon, 24.10.11 12:21, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm resending the pull request (previously as a patch series) for systemadm
> updates:
>
Thanks a ton, all merged now.
> I've fixed the things that were pointed out... apart from the idea
> to split out gtk p
On Wed, 02.11.11 13:03, NeilBrown (ne...@suse.de) wrote:
> > I'd really prefer if we could somehow make it something that isn't
> > special and we could just shutdown
>
> It must remain running until the array that it manages is read-only and will
> never be written to again. Then it can be shut
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:55:56PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 02.11.11 12:15, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
>
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> > >> On Thu, 27.10.
On Wed, 02.11.11 15:19, Karel Zak (k...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > I guess, if such broken configs should be supported, which I'm really
> > > not sure about, fsck itself should be made to find that out and return
> > > successful without doing anything. Such things should not be guarded
> > > in sy
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:15:29PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> >> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
> >>
> >> > You really don't want to
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 14:32, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 02.11.11 13:03, NeilBrown (ne...@suse.de) wrote:
>
>> > I'd really prefer if we could somehow make it something that isn't
>> > special and we could just shutdown
>>
>> It must remain running until the array that it manages is read-
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 15:27, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:15:29PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
>> > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
>> >> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@s
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 03:39:37PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 15:27, Karel Zak wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:15:29PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> >> > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poetteri
From: Reindl Harald , Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:13:13 +0100
> until now i found no suiteable way except my A version
> to make sure that i can start and stop netatalk full
> funtionally with one command
It seems to be possible with one command.
# systemctl start netatalk-cnid_metad.service netatalk-afp
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 15:46, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 03:39:37PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> > Unfortunately major(s.st_rdev) is probably useless, try to mount any
>> > btrfs device :-)
>>
>> Yeah, it was about fsck only, not mount. :)
>
> Hmm... I'm talking about fsck, try
On Wed, 02.11.11 15:33, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
> > The big thing is that if things are done that way you'll always have the
> > chicken and egg problem: you really need to shut down mdmon before
> > unmounting root, but currently you require us to do it in the other
> > order to
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 16:17, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Kernel threads we detect by checking whether /proc/$PID/cmdline is
> empty, hence I'd suggest we use the first char of argv[0][0] here, to
> detect whether something is a process to avoid killing. Question is
> which char to choose for that
On Wed, 02.11.11 16:21, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 16:17, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > Kernel threads we detect by checking whether /proc/$PID/cmdline is
> > empty, hence I'd suggest we use the first char of argv[0][0] here, to
> > detect whether som
Am 02.11.2011 15:48, schrieb HAT:
> From: Reindl Harald , Tue, 01 Nov 2011 16:13:13 +0100
>> until now i found no suiteable way except my A version
>> to make sure that i can start and stop netatalk full
>> funtionally with one command
>
> It seems to be possible with one command.
>
> # systemc
>> # systemctl start netatalk-cnid_metad.service netatalk-afpd.service
>
> yes, please go this way for the public packages to get them
> work in a clean way with systemd, i will overwrite in /etc/systemd
> because i don't like have to think about both services
hmm, there is still a problem.
# sy
Am 02.11.2011 17:20, schrieb HAT:
>>> # systemctl start netatalk-cnid_metad.service netatalk-afpd.service
>>
>> yes, please go this way for the public packages to get them
>> work in a clean way with systemd, i will overwrite in /etc/systemd
>> because i don't like have to think about both servic
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 19:26, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> I didn't really give this much testing, so it would be good if you could
> check out if this works for you!
I built git version as of 263653e10353d8ad155f1faba01981816a2bb712 and
indeed this fixes the simple case.
> I have now commited a
From: Reindl Harald , Wed, 02 Nov 2011 17:27:19 +0100
> Am 02.11.2011 17:20, schrieb HAT:
# systemctl start netatalk-cnid_metad.service netatalk-afpd.service
>>>
>>> yes, please go this way for the public packages to get them
>>> work in a clean way with systemd, i will overwrite in /etc/syste
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 02.11.11 15:33, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
>
>> > The big thing is that if things are done that way you'll always have the
>> > chicken and egg problem: you really need to shut down mdmon before
>> > unmounting root
Am 02.11.2011 17:58, schrieb HAT:
> From: Reindl Harald , Wed, 02 Nov 2011 17:27:19 +0100
>> Am 02.11.2011 17:20, schrieb HAT:
> # systemctl start netatalk-cnid_metad.service netatalk-afpd.service
yes, please go this way for the public packages to get them
work in a clean way w
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
> People who like to put their rootfs on a userspace managed raid device
> just get what they asked for. :)
Proper care and feeding of mdmon and userspace managed block devices /
filesystems is a solvable problem. To me the ":)" runs the risk of
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 19:16, Williams, Dan J wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> People who like to put their rootfs on a userspace managed raid device
>> just get what they asked for. :)
>
> Proper care and feeding of mdmon and userspace managed block devices /
> file
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 19:16, Williams, Dan J
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>>> People who like to put their rootfs on a userspace managed raid device
>>> just get what they asked for. :)
>>
>> Proper care an
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 20:31, Williams, Dan J wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 19:16, Williams, Dan J
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
People who like to put their rootfs on a userspace managed raid devi
Is there a way to disable systemd's flapping detection that causes it
to give up on starting services that exit too quickly? The closest
thing I can find to controlling this is the Restart= option, but that
doesn't seem to do what I need. My situation is that each PC is a
node of a cluster. When
2011/11/2 tsuraan :
> Is there a way to disable systemd's flapping detection that causes it
> to give up on starting services that exit too quickly? The closest
> thing I can find to controlling this is the Restart= option, but that
> doesn't seem to do what I need. My situation is that each PC i
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 02.11.11 16:21, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 16:17, Lennart Poettering
>> wrote:
>> > Kernel threads we detect by checking whether /proc/$PID/cmdline is
>> > empty, hence I'd suggest w
On Wed, 02.11.11 10:21, Williams, Dan J (dan.j.willi...@intel.com) wrote:
> > That means we'd:
> >
> > a) patch systemd to check whether argv[0][0] of a process is '@' and
> > owned by root and exclude it from killing on shutdown.
> >
> > b) patch mdmon to set argv[0][0] of itself to '@' iff it is
On Wed, 02.11.11 15:18, Williams, Dan J (dan.j.willi...@intel.com) wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 02.11.11 16:21, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 16:17, Lennart Poettering
> >> wrote:
> >> > Kern
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 02.11.11 15:18, Williams, Dan J (dan.j.willi...@intel.com) wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Lennart Poettering
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 02.11.11 16:21, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On Wed
> RestartSec allows you to set the time waited before restarting so that
> you can avoid systemd needing to restart the service too often before
> it starts successfully.
Is there a cooldown period that I need to exceed to prevent systemd
from giving up? Assuming it takes 5 failures (however that
2011/11/3 tsuraan :
>> RestartSec allows you to set the time waited before restarting so that
>> you can avoid systemd needing to restart the service too often before
>> it starts successfully.
>
> Is there a cooldown period that I need to exceed to prevent systemd
> from giving up? Assuming it ta
39 matches
Mail list logo
