Am 18.12.2014 um 21:26 schrieb Spencer Baugh:
Quoting Kay Sievers (2014-12-18 15:04:22)
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 07:09:34PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 12/18/2014 06:44 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 1
On Thu, 18.12.14 18:48, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 11:19:22AM -0500, Spencer Baugh wrote:
> > Quoting Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (2014-12-18 04:08:32)
> > >
> > > On 12/18/2014 04:00 AM, Spencer Baugh wrote:
> > > > When printing the status of a un
Quoting Kay Sievers (2014-12-18 15:04:22)
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 07:09:34PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >>
> >> On 12/18/2014 06:44 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >On 12/18/2014 06:36 PM, Zbign
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 07:09:34PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>
>> On 12/18/2014 06:44 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> >
>> >On 12/18/2014 06:36 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> >>You missed the part w
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 07:09:34PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
> On 12/18/2014 06:44 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >
> >On 12/18/2014 06:36 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >>You missed the part where I said "you should make it opt-in".
> >
> >Should we not first determi
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 06:44:25PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
> On 12/18/2014 06:36 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >You missed the part where I said "you should make it opt-in".
>
> Should we not first determine the practicality of implementing this
> and if the system serv
On 12/18/2014 06:44 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 12/18/2014 06:36 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
You missed the part where I said "you should make it opt-in".
Should we not first determine the practicality of implementing this
and if the system service manager should actual
On 12/18/2014 06:36 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
You missed the part where I said "you should make it opt-in".
Should we not first determine the practicality of implementing this and
if the system service manager should actually be looking up this info to
begin with?
We could not
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 06:33:50PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
> On 12/18/2014 05:48 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> >I think you should make it opt-in, with a command-line switch
> >(--show-package ?).
> >In some cases it can be very useful, but most of the time it would
> >
On 12/18/2014 05:48 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
I think you should make it opt-in, with a command-line switch (--show-package
?).
In some cases it can be very useful, but most of the time it would
be just a slow down. If the switch is used, and packagekit does not
work, then this sho
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 11:19:22AM -0500, Spencer Baugh wrote:
> Quoting Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (2014-12-18 04:08:32)
> >
> > On 12/18/2014 04:00 AM, Spencer Baugh wrote:
> > > When printing the status of a unit, open a connection to the session bus
> > > and query PackageKit for the package that t
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 18.12.2014 um 17:19 schrieb Spencer Baugh:
>>
>> Quoting Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (2014-12-18 04:08:32)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/18/2014 04:00 AM, Spencer Baugh wrote:
When printing the status of a unit, open a connection to the session
Am 18.12.2014 um 17:19 schrieb Spencer Baugh:
Quoting Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (2014-12-18 04:08:32)
On 12/18/2014 04:00 AM, Spencer Baugh wrote:
When printing the status of a unit, open a connection to the session bus
and query PackageKit for the package that the unit file belongs
to. Print it
Quoting Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (2014-12-18 04:08:32)
>
> On 12/18/2014 04:00 AM, Spencer Baugh wrote:
> > When printing the status of a unit, open a connection to the session bus
> > and query PackageKit for the package that the unit file belongs
> > to. Print it if PackageKit knows.
>
> There are
On 12/18/2014 09:24 AM, Alexandre Detiste wrote:
Hi,
You could maybe think of adding some "Package=" ou "SourcePackage="
attribute in units to let users
known where this unit came from.
This would work like "SourcePath=" does for generated units.
No this is not very smart to do in general fr
Hi,
You could maybe think of adding some "Package=" ou "SourcePackage="
attribute in units to let users
known where this unit came from.
This would work like "SourcePath=" does for generated units.
Alexandre Detiste
2014-12-18 10:08 GMT+01:00 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" :
>
> On 12/18/2014 04:00 AM
On 12/18/2014 04:00 AM, Spencer Baugh wrote:
When printing the status of a unit, open a connection to the session bus
and query PackageKit for the package that the unit file belongs
to. Print it if PackageKit knows.
There are gazillion package manager in the wild and this will
significantly d
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 7:00 AM, Spencer Baugh wrote:
> When printing the status of a unit, open a connection to the session bus
> and query PackageKit for the package that the unit file belongs
> to. Print it if PackageKit knows.
Searching packages database may be quite time consuming. At least
When printing the status of a unit, open a connection to the session bus
and query PackageKit for the package that the unit file belongs
to. Print it if PackageKit knows.
---
src/systemctl/systemctl.c | 32
1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
diff --git a/src/systemc
19 matches
Mail list logo
