31.10.2024 16:03, Phillip Susi wrote:
Lennart Poettering writes:
Doing the locking on the fd you use for writing makes things a lot
easier, because as mentioned udev will automatically retrigger block
devices if an inotify event on it is seen that indicates
"close-after-write". If you deal wit
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 10:23 AM Lennart Poettering
wrote:
>
> On Do, 31.10.24 09:03, Phillip Susi (ph...@thesusis.net) wrote:
>
> > Lennart Poettering writes:
> >
> > Yes, but then it reads the disk and auto mounts a partition just because
> > someone ran parted print. Printing the partition ta
On Do, 31.10.24 09:03, Phillip Susi (ph...@thesusis.net) wrote:
> Lennart Poettering writes:
>
> > Doing the locking on the fd you use for writing makes things a lot
> > easier, because as mentioned udev will automatically retrigger block
> > devices if an inotify event on it is seen that indicat
Lennart Poettering writes:
> Doing the locking on the fd you use for writing makes things a lot
> easier, because as mentioned udev will automatically retrigger block
> devices if an inotify event on it is seen that indicates
> "close-after-write". If you deal with multiple fds you need to make
Hi Thorsten,
If I understand correctly, you're looking for a way to distribute sysexts
such that they can be enabled/disabled, and they're updated in lock step
with each other and the base OS. Is that correct?
If so, you're looking for Optional Features [1], which will release with 257
Best,
Adr
On 31/10/2024 12:48, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Do, 31.10.24 10:20, Steve Traylen (steve.tray...@cern.ch) wrote:
Hi,
I was trying to suppress user scope units that are considered failed due to
them requiring a SIGKILL. Typical log might be.
Oct 30 10:27:55 node989.example.ch systemd[1]: se
On Do, 31.10.24 10:20, Steve Traylen (steve.tray...@cern.ch) wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I was trying to suppress user scope units that are considered failed due to
> them requiring a SIGKILL. Typical log might be.
>
> Oct 30 10:27:55 node989.example.ch systemd[1]: session-3804.scope: Killing
> process 155
Hi,
I'm currently working on integrating systemd-sysext in MicroOS.
For this I created several sysext images with different tools (e.g.
"gcc", "debug", ...) which I can add in parallel.
Which, besides some problems with SELinux and transactional-update, works.
Now the idea is to use systemd-sysu
Hi,
I was trying to suppress user scope units that are considered failed due
to them requiring a SIGKILL. Typical log might be.
Oct 30 10:27:55 node989.example.ch systemd[1]: session-3804.scope:
Killing process 1550946 (node) with signal SIGKILL.
Oct 30 10:29:25 node989.example.ch systemd[1
