On 05/20/2011 12:00 AM, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2011 14:59:57 +0200
Lennart Poettering wrote:
I am sorry that reality bothers you so much, but it is the hard old real
world ...
See, I am so young, I still have the idealism that we can fix what is
broken.
And you're going to go abo
On 05/20/2011 06:00 AM, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> And you're going to go about it by removing something that people have
> been using for many years, replacing it with a vague promise of a
> better solution.
The ability to run programs before shutdown has not been removed.
Looks like you missed all t
On Thu, 19 May 2011 14:59:57 +0200
Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > I am sorry that reality bothers you so much, but it is the hard old real
> > world ...
>
> See, I am so young, I still have the idealism that we can fix what is
> broken.
And you're going to go about it by removing something that
On Thu, 19 May 2011 14:16:30 +0100
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 08:05:46AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> > Some other, more data-centered UPSs that handle multiple machines use
> > completely proprietary protocols over ethernet for example.
>
> I thought we were talking about
Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) said:
> > > What race are we talking about exactly ?
> >
> > Host requests power down from UPS in 30s. Host then continues shut
> > down. If the host now ends up taking more time then expected for
> > shutting down it might still be busy at the time of the power goi
On Thu, 19.05.11 19:37, Tomasz Torcz (to...@pipebreaker.pl) wrote:
> > > > This is not the case and never has been the case. The root disks
> > > > traditionally could not be unmounted and hence MD/DM/MP and so on could
> > > > not be disassembled before going down.
> > > >
> > > > Delaying shutd
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:04:33PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 16.05.11 14:30, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 18:59 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > On Mon, 16.05.11 14:32, Michal Hlavinka (mhlav...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >
> > > > when u
On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 14:16 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 08:05:46AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> > Some other, more data-centered UPSs that handle multiple machines use
> > completely proprietary protocols over ethernet for example.
>
> I thought we were talking about a
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 08:05:46AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> Some other, more data-centered UPSs that handle multiple machines use
> completely proprietary protocols over ethernet for example.
I thought we were talking about a function that was called as the last
thing before the kernel was hal
On Thu, 19.05.11 02:06, Matthew Garrett (mj...@srcf.ucam.org) wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:42:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> > > I am pretty sure we don't want to run Java programs at late boot, as
> > > root. This would be really bad.
> >
> > You know, it's not like there is a choi
On Wed, 18.05.11 19:42, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > > This is not the case and never has been the case. The root disks
> > > > traditionally could not be unmounted and hence MD/DM/MP and so on could
> > > > not be disassembled before going down.
> > > >
> > > > Delaying shutdown b
On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 02:06 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:42:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> > > I am pretty sure we don't want to run Java programs at late boot, as
> > > root. This would be really bad.
> >
> > You know, it's not like there is a choice for many mod
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 21:15 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 06:42 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 16:48 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
> >> On 05/18/2011 04:04 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >>> Host requests power down from UPS in 30s. Host then continues shut
> >>> dow
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:42:02PM -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> We are however talking about a lot of different upses and while it is
> not specifically fedora's problem we do need to have this handled
> before rhel7, for example, is run on serious systems.
If it's a functional requirement, it'll g
On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 02:06 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:42:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> > > I am pretty sure we don't want to run Java programs at late boot, as
> > > root. This would be really bad.
> >
> > You know, it's not like there is a choice for many mod
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 09:27:23PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 09:06 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:42:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >>
> >> You know, it's not like there is a choice for many models ...
> >
> > That's really not a given. For anything
On 05/18/2011 06:42 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 16:48 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
>> On 05/18/2011 04:04 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>> Host requests power down from UPS in 30s. Host then continues shut
>>> down. If the host now ends up taking more time then expected for
>>> s
On 05/18/2011 09:06 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:42:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>
>> You know, it's not like there is a choice for many models ...
>
> That's really not a given. For anything short of us having to send http
> requests, there's no fundamental reason wh
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:42:17PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> > I am pretty sure we don't want to run Java programs at late boot, as
> > root. This would be really bad.
>
> You know, it's not like there is a choice for many models ...
That's really not a given. For anything short of us having to
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 16:48 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
> On 05/18/2011 04:04 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > Host requests power down from UPS in 30s. Host then continues shut
> > down. If the host now ends up taking more time then expected for
> > shutting down it might still be busy at the ti
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 23:04 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 16.05.11 14:30, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 18:59 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > On Mon, 16.05.11 14:32, Michal Hlavinka (mhlav...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >
> > > > when ups reci
On 05/18/2011 04:04 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Host requests power down from UPS in 30s. Host then continues shut
> down. If the host now ends up taking more time then expected for
> shutting down it might still be busy at the time of the power going
> away. It's a race between "UPS powering o
On Mon, 16.05.11 14:30, Simo Sorce (sso...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 18:59 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Mon, 16.05.11 14:32, Michal Hlavinka (mhlav...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > > when ups recieves command for shutdown, it does not shutdown power
> > > immediately, b
On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 18:59 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 16.05.11 14:32, Michal Hlavinka (mhlav...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > when ups recieves command for shutdown, it does not shutdown power
> > immediately, but after 30 seconds. Given that this command should be
> > executed
> > af
On Tue, 17.05.11 15:42, Michal Hlavinka (mhlav...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > > 5) in old initscripts, there was /etc/init.d/halt with section for ups
> > > shutdown. With that script gone, was that functionality ported to
> > > systemd
> > > somehow?
> >
> > Well, any such code is just inherently
> > 5) in old initscripts, there was /etc/init.d/halt with section for ups
> > shutdown. With that script gone, was that functionality ported to
> > systemd
> > somehow?
>
> Well, any such code is just inherently broken. It *cannot* work. A
> number of kernel subsystems hook into the shutdown code
On Mon, 16.05.11 14:32, Michal Hlavinka (mhlav...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > > 2) does systemd have support for conditions in service files? It seem
> > > it's not supported right now. Is there any plan for this?
> >
> > I am not entirely sure what you understand by "condition",
>
> for example c
> > 2) does systemd have support for conditions in service files? It seem
> > it's not supported right now. Is there any plan for this?
>
> I am not entirely sure what you understand by "condition",
for example condition based on string/variable in file, so:
a) EnvironmentFile=/etc/sysconfig/some
On Sun, 15.05.11 19:28, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > Well, adding 30s-sleep()s here and there and everywhere is a hack, not a
> > clean fix. But if you have a lot of sync to disk, and/or a slow disk,
> > then 30s might
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> Well, adding 30s-sleep()s here and there and everywhere is a hack, not a
> clean fix. But if you have a lot of sync to disk, and/or a slow disk,
> then 30s might not be enough and you are fucked.
I can't see where would that "a lot of sy
On Sun, 15.05.11 17:05, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> On 05/15/2011 04:08 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > Well, but ExecStartPre= doesn't help you with this. As it is run only
> > after the service is already stopped.
> >
> > It has been suggested that we add ExecResta
On 05/15/2011 05:05 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 05/15/2011 04:08 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> Well, but ExecStartPre= doesn't help you with this. As it is run only
>> after the service is already stopped.
>>
>> It has been suggested that we add ExecRestartPre=, i.e. something we run
On 05/15/2011 04:08 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> Well, but ExecStartPre= doesn't help you with this. As it is run only
> after the service is already stopped.
>
> It has been suggested that we add ExecRestartPre=, i.e. something we run
> before stopping a service for a restart. It has been on th
On Sun, 15.05.11 18:29, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> >> 5) in old initscripts, there was /etc/init.d/halt with section for ups
> >> shutdown. With that script gone, was that functionality ported to systemd
> >> somehow?
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
>> 5) in old initscripts, there was /etc/init.d/halt with section for ups
>> shutdown. With that script gone, was that functionality ported to systemd
>> somehow?
>
> Well, any such code is just inherently broken. It *cannot* work.
Such co
On Sun, 15.05.11 15:55, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> On 05/15/2011 01:59 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Thu, 12.05.11 17:04, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >> You can run ExecStartPre= before starting a service for syntax checking
> >> b
On 05/15/2011 01:59 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Thu, 12.05.11 17:04, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> You can run ExecStartPre= before starting a service for syntax checking
>> before starting the service like we do for ..
>>
>> ExecStartPre=/usr/sbin/radiusd -C
>> Ex
On Thu, 12.05.11 17:04, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> You can run ExecStartPre= before starting a service for syntax checking
> before starting the service like we do for ..
>
> ExecStartPre=/usr/sbin/radiusd -C
> ExecStartPre=/usr/sbin/named-checkconf /etc/named.conf
>
On Thu, 12.05.11 15:28, Michal Hlavinka (mhlav...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Hi,
Heya,
> I'm working with nut upstream to test sysv->systemd changes, but I found some
> problems and they've came up with a few questions too.
>
> 1) does systemd support alternative to "service sthd configtest" or othe
On Fri, 13.05.11 23:57, Philip Prindeville (philipp_s...@redfish-solutions.com)
wrote:
> I installed F15B, but now I'm seeing:
>
> May 13 23:01:01 mail /usr/sbin/crond[5243]: pam_systemd(crond:session):
> Moving new user session for root into control group /user/root/18.
> May 13 23:01:01 mail
On Sat, 2011-05-14 at 07:58 +0100, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 14/05/11 06:57, Philip Prindeville wrote:
>
> > Also, now that we don't use upstart, what's the equivalent of:
> >
> > chkconfig service on
> >
>
> systemctl enable\disable foo.service
And at least for now, you can still do chkconfig a
On 14/05/11 06:57, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> Also, now that we don't use upstart, what's the equivalent of:
>
> chkconfig service on
>
systemctl enable\disable foo.service
--
Regards,
Frank Murphy
UTF_8 Encoded
Friend of Fedora
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://adm
On 05/12/2011 03:12 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2011 15:28:54 +0200 Michal Hlavinka wrote:
>> > 1) does systemd support alternative to "service sthd configtest" or
>> > other special actions?
> No.
>
You can run ExecStartPre= before starting a service for syntax checking
before
On Thu, 12 May 2011 15:28:54 +0200 Michal Hlavinka wrote:
> 1) does systemd support alternative to "service sthd configtest" or
> other special actions?
No.
> 2) does systemd have support for conditions in service files? It seem
> it's not supported right now. Is there any plan for this?
Can you
Hi,
2011/5/12 Michal Hlavinka :
> Hi,
>
> I'm working with nut upstream to test sysv->systemd changes, but I found some
> problems and they've came up with a few questions too.
>
>
> 1) does systemd support alternative to "service sthd configtest" or other
> special actions?
>
>
> 2) does systemd
45 matches
Mail list logo
