Could not find debuginfo pkg for dependency package. . .

I've been experiencing some mutter crashes when trying to report it via abrt, abrt informed me that reporting was disabled because the backtrace is unusable and suggested I installed debuginfo-install mutter then refresh and try again which revealed. .. Could not find debuginfo pkg for dependency

Re: Could not find debuginfo pkg for dependency package. . .

On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 16:01 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 22:23:11 + > Jóhann "B." Guðmundsson wrote: > > > I've been experiencing some mutter crashes when trying to report it > > via abrt, abrt informed me that reporting was disabled b

Re: state of systemd in Fedora and services pledge

On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 20:40 +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > Hi, > > I wonder what is the actual state of Fedora systemd integration? I > hope that there is more systemd native services than listed on > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Johannbg/QA/Systemd/compatability I'm planning on review

Re: Plans for BTRFS in Fedora

On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 14:51 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: > So what are your thoughts? Thanks, Will there be any performance penalties making this move? I ran it on my workstation when F13 came out with updates+snapshots and while updating my desktop responsiveness was well not so good. Novice en

Re: Packaging Request: sigil

i can take over the packing for sigil -S On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Matt McCutchen wrote: > On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 08:13 +0530, A. Mani wrote: > > sigil is not available from yum > > > > http://code.google.com/p/sigil/ > > > > It is easy to install from source on F > > You can add it here:

Re: "Workstation" Product defaults to wide-open firewall

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > > I just happened to look at the firewalld default settings, and I > > was not amused when I noticed this: > > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/firewalld.git/tree/FedoraWorkstation.xml > > > > > > > > This "firewall" is a joke! ALL higher ports

Re: "Workstation" Product defaults to wide-open firewall

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:08:06 +0100 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > On Tue, 2014-12-09 at 17:29 +1030, William B wrote: > > > > I just happened to look at the firewalld default settings, and I > > > > was not amused when I

Re: "Workstation" Product defaults to wide-open firewall

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > > If by opening up some ports that would have hampered the user, rather > than protect them[1], we avoid the users disabling the firewall, and > exposing security critical services (such as exposing rpcbind, or > ntpd, or any other root service), th

Re: F22 System Wide Change: Default Local DNS Resolver

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > To install a local DNS resolver trusted for the DNSSEC validation > running on 127.0.0.1:53. This must be the only name server entry > in /etc/resolv.conf. snip ... > People use Fedora on portable/mobile devices which are connected to > divers

Re: F22 System Wide Change: Default Local DNS Resolver

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 13 Jan 2015 21:02:09 +0100 Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 13.01.2015 um 20:56 schrieb William B: > > Unbound creates more flakiness than it solves. Unbound caches "no > > answer" as a negative cache entry. I

Re: Fast-track Nonresponsive maintainer: Frank B??ttner (frankb)

Am 30.01.2010 10:47, schrieb Chen Lei: > Hi all, > > Frank B??ttner seems reluctant to be responsive. > > I fixed one FTBFS bug assigned to him in qtiplot. > > I posted a non responsive maintainer tracker bug, but he closed soon and was > reluctant to expl

Re: [HEADS-UP] adding missing systemd links in rawhide/F14 upgrades

On 08/04/2010 06:05 PM, Frank Murphy wrote: > This from an F13.x86> F14-Rawhide> F14-Branched Guest > (Host if F13.x86_64) > > Some still from the video: > > http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-040810-185144.php > > http://www.zimagez.com/zimage/screenshot-040810-185343.php > > http://www.

Re: [HEADS-UP] adding missing systemd links in rawhide/F14 upgrades

On 08/11/2010 09:02 AM, Rudolf Kastl wrote: instead of trying to workaround the problem i actually tried to check if a clean install of latest package would work properly with this result: Installing : systemd-units-5-2.fc15.x86_64 This is far from being the latest packages ( the latest b

Re: [HEADS-UP] adding missing systemd links in rawhide/F14 upgrades

On 08/11/2010 10:32 AM, Rudolf Kastl wrote: > 2010/8/11 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": >> On 08/11/2010 09:02 AM, Rudolf Kastl wrote: >> >> instead of trying to workaround the problem i actually tried to check >> if a clean install of latest package wo

Re: If you cannot boot after installing systemd v8...

On 08/26/2010 12:05 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > FYI, Fedora 14 Alpha testers: > > Please read the following, since this update issue will hit you after > you install Fedora 14 Alpha and then update. > > We probably need to spread this news out wider and add to the Common > F14 bugs page And emph

Re: fedora mission (was Re: systemd and changes)

On 08/27/2010 10:47 PM, Bob Arendt wrote: Actually I think Fedora*should* articulate who the users are, basically design and express who and what Fedora is designed for. If you poll "users" - people who download Fedora - and cater to their stated desires for the sake of market share, then mark

Re: fedora mission (was Re: systemd and changes)

On 08/28/2010 05:31 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 17:16:12 +, >"\"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\"" wrote: >> It's not far from reality that Red Hat will get bought by a company >> like Oracle so what's preventing us

Re: fedora mission (was Re: systemd and changes)

On 08/28/2010 06:42 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > This is utter bullshit. It assumes that anybody who works in the corporate > world and happens to have an interest in Fedora is somehow going to be a > puppet for the Smokey backroom corporate overlords and their evil designs > upon Fedora. It's l

Re: fedora mission (was Re: systemd and changes)

On 08/28/2010 08:28 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > What are you afraid of? I think my concerns have been very clear. > Fedora is not a country, you don't have to move to get away. All the code > is free. Most the code isn't even ours, it belongs to the upstreams. If > somebody were to buy RHT,

Re: fedora mission (was Re: systemd and changes)

On 08/28/2010 09:40 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > Dennis is his backup (RH employee) and if need be I know jwb (not redhat > employee) is more than capable of handling these problems. Believe it or > not, we do consider these things and cross train. If you have the > several hours per week availabl

Re: fedora mission (was Re: systemd and changes)

On 08/28/2010 09:40 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > I know it's not a comfortable thing to deal with, I know I'm not super > happy about it but Fedora exists almost entirely because RH wills it to. > If RH decided Fedora should go away, it would. You could fork, have a > mess of a time getting infrast

Re: fedora mission (was Re: systemd and changes)

On 08/29/2010 05:29 AM, Mike McGrath wrote: > Beats me, but not to releng, the team who's ability you were calling into > question. Could you care to explain to me how I'm was calling releng ability into question? -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.

Re: Meeting summary/minutes from today's FESCo meeting (2010-09-14)

On 09/14/2010 10:01 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >* ACTION: : will defer systemd to f15 release to give more time to fix > small issues and docs and general polish. (nirik, 21:12:43) What are you kidding me! Gnome-shell better be sparkling out of aunt Tilly pony eyes before we ship it.. JB

Re: Meeting summary/minutes from today's FESCo meeting (2010-09-14)

On 09/15/2010 12:01 AM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 3:56 PM, James Laska wrote: >> Much like we introduced and communicated btrfs support in F-11, should >> we communicate systemd as a technology preview in Fedora 14? > I would agree with this. I certainly plan to run F14 with

Re: Questions about Fusion Linux

On 10/19/2010 03:29 PM, TK009 wrote: > I got an email this morning from the Fusion Linux group. In it, the > group lead suggested this to one of his users - > > "Fusion 14 betais based on Fedora 14 which isn't released yet so there > could be number of bugs that haven't been fixed yet. I suggest

Re: bugzilla bugzappers?

On 11/04/2010 01:21 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 04.11.2010, 13:28 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt: >> On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 21:41:22 +0100, Bert wrote: >>> So can someone please explain my why I should continue to try to >>> improve Fedora by reporting bugs ? >> Glad you ask this.

Re: bugzilla bugzappers?

On 11/04/2010 04:24 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 04:10:31PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: >> If the maintainer is not responding to reports or not acting as the link >> to upstream ( that if he's not upstream himself ) for the compon

Re: bugzilla bugzappers?

On 11/04/2010 07:47 PM, Matt McCutchen wrote: > If someone else cares and retests, they ideally > would be able to reopen it, but Bugzilla currently doesn't allow that Somebody can correct me if I'm wrong but as I recall we changed that deliberately. ( should be a discussion about this in this li

Re: bugzilla bugzappers?

On 11/04/2010 10:22 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: > 2- ABRT should keep track of unresponsive users. If a user has an > outstanding "needinfo?" flag for the bugs sent through ABRT, he > shouldn't be able to send a new bug report through ABRT for my > packages. > Since this has turned into general pony

Re: bugzilla bugzappers?

nd work on. One of the problem to solve with that is how we can equally cover all componets since we fear that users would cherry pick and jump on the component they love and leave more underthehood critical components out. Basically popular component nr1 has 30 testers/triager while more vital cr

Re: bugzilla bugzappers?

On 11/06/2010 01:53 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 11/05/2010 09:46 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: >> On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 17:56:51 +0100, Ralf wrote: >> >>> ABRT >>> It doesn't tell the user that core dumps without reproducer are >>> worthless in most cases but blindly sends out reports >> Parts of th

Re: bugzilla bugzappers?

On 11/06/2010 02:11 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 11/05/2010 10:06 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: >> On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 23:58:21 +, Jóhann wrote: >> >>> On behalf of all reporters that have never received a response from a >>> maintainer on a component they have reported against I not only ask t

Re: BTRFS: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

On 07/14/2011 01:07 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> Am 13.07.2011 23:54, schrieb Michael Cronenworth: >>> Farkas Levente wrote: >>> That's not the case at all, I'm not sure where you are getting that. >>> If we don't have a released offline

Re: on /etc/sysconfig

On 07/18/2011 06:57 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 18.07.11 20:54, Michał Piotrowski (mkkp...@gmail.com) wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> 2011/7/18 Neal Becker: >>> This article recommends ending /etc/sysconfig >>> >>> http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/on-etc-sysinit.html >>> >> Generally speaking I l

Re: systemd vice SysV/LSB init systems - what next ?

On 07/19/2011 11:11 AM, JB wrote: > Hi, > > My suggestion is that you keep both init systems, SysV/LSB and systemd, > as separate offerings out of many, and forever so. > > You would install them as suitable for your individual system needs. > The SysV/LSB system init would be default as is now. F

Re: systemd vice SysV/LSB init systems - what next ?

On 07/19/2011 05:59 PM, Fulko Hew wrote: On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Jeff Spaleta > wrote: On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:51 AM, seth vidal mailto:skvi...@fedoraproject.org>> wrote: > I agree with one section of your argument: > arguments which are

Re: systemd vice SysV/LSB init systems - what next ?

On 07/19/2011 06:43 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > 2011/7/19 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": >> Hum best is to provide you with example which daemon do you maintain I can >> convert it for you and provide it to you as an example anyway here's an >> example of a systemd unit

Re: systemd vice SysV/LSB init systems - what next ?

On 07/19/2011 07:06 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le mardi 19 juillet 2011 à 18:30 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" a > écrit : > >> Hum best is to provide you with example which daemon do you maintain I >> can convert it for you and provide it to you as an example a

Re: systemd vice SysV/LSB init systems - what next ?

On 07/19/2011 07:51 PM, Alexander Kurtakov wrote: FWIW, tomcat package (note the missing 6) is at version 7.x.y and ships with the systemd integration and seems to be working fine. Alexander Kurtakov If you are speaking of this then that fails to meet the pack

Re: General systemd questions in respect to Fedora project.

On 07/20/2011 08:58 AM, Lucas wrote: > On 07/20/2011 12:03 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: >> hey Lucas, >> >> Can you point me to the on system manpage and docs for >> console-kit-daemon which is running be default on my F15 install? I >> can't seem to find the documentation. >> >> >>> From my reading ab

Re: systemd vice SysV/LSB init systems - what next ?

On 07/20/2011 09:06 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le Mer 20 juillet 2011 01:12, Jeff Spaleta a écrit : >> On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Nicolas Mailhot >> wrote: >>> All this code is here just to instanciate the service and do the related >>> housekeeping. It does not belong in a separate scrip

Re: new cg-manager gui tool for managin cgroups

On 07/21/2011 03:36 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > IIRC, you can already set cgroups configuration in the service's > systemd unit file, using something like: > > ControlGroup="cpu:/foo/bar mem:/wizz" > > though I can't find the manpage right now. man systemd.exec or http://0pointer.de/publi

Re: thanks for F15 mdadm systemd unit

On 07/22/2011 02:01 AM, Doug Ledford wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 7/20/2011 6:05 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> Am 20.07.2011 22:06, schrieb Doug Ledford: >>> On 07/15/2011 05:20 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=25

Re: thanks for F15 mdadm systemd unit

On 07/22/2011 04:37 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote: > MD, NFS, clustering have complicated and complex needs. The systemd team - not > just the developers of those subsystems - need to be directly engaged and > proactive in getting all of these critical systems converted cleanly I think you actually go

Re: thanks for F15 mdadm systemd unit

On 07/22/2011 05:02 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote: I don't have it backwards - my day job is to work on exactly getting this kind of cutting edge feature out to end users. Which feature of this magnitute have you put out to your users? Serously if you have some motivation tips to get things moving I a

Re: thanks for F15 mdadm systemd unit

On 07/23/2011 11:24 AM, Ric Wheeler wrote: > > > What I think that you and others are not given credit is that most > upstream maintainers have very long lists of things to do. The NFS > team is swamped doing support for pNFS (version 4.1) and has been > going through massive change for example.

Re: Meeting minutes/summary for 2011-07-25 FESCo meeting

On 07/25/2011 06:22 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > * need to get audidt #617321 iscsi #714688 NFS-Utils #699040 > Tigervnc #717227 dnsmasq #694932 openvpn #714710 speech-dispatcherd > #697600 smolt #697612 wpa_supplicant #661230 done before next > tuesday if at all possible. (niri

Re: Meeting minutes/summary for 2011-07-25 FESCo meeting

On 07/25/2011 06:37 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 07/25/2011 06:22 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: >> * need to get audidt #617321 iscsi #714688 NFS-Utils #699040 >> Tigervnc #717227 dnsmasq #694932 openvpn #714710 speech-dispatcherd >> #6976

Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery

On 07/29/2011 07:47 AM, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 10:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Just a quick heads-up that I plan to look unto packaging the >> gnome shell frippery extensions this weekend, if you've the >> same plans or are already working on this, please let me know. >

Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery

On 07/29/2011 08:57 AM, drago01 wrote: > Well in gnome 3.2 (which should be out for F16) extensions will be > like firefox extensions i.e you go to extensions.gnome.org and click > "install" to install an extension. > Distro packaged extensions are frowned upon upstream. Is it not then better to s

Re: Intent to package GNOME Shell frippery

On 07/29/2011 09:21 AM, drago01 wrote: > 2011/7/29 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": >> On 07/29/2011 08:57 AM, drago01 wrote: >>> Well in gnome 3.2 (which should be out for F16) extensions will be >>> like firefox extensions i.e you go to extensions.gnome.org

Re: Default services enabled

On 08/19/2011 12:35 PM, Steve Grubb wrote: > On Friday, August 19, 2011 03:41:33 AM Tim Waugh wrote: >> On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 16:52 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote: >>> It's not so much cups start up being slow as discovering network >>> printers. That can take up to a minute I think. >> This is true.

Re: Default services enabled

On 08/19/2011 03:39 PM, Steve Grubb wrote: > We need a way to specify in the service init files which targets the service > is allowed > to run in by default. You do that in the install section of the unit file [Install] WantedBy=$foo.target So basically all desktop related service should only

Re: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SysVtoSystemd

On 09/06/2011 02:55 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Reindl Harald (h.rei...@thelounge.net) said: >> the alpha was release and >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SysVtoSystemd >> is at 0% - why will F16 released WITHOUT making the system clean which >> should have been done for F15 > Perhaps th

Re: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SysVtoSystemd

On 09/03/2011 09:47 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 07:46, Reindl Harald >> wrote: .. > We need to get a provenpackager to just poke through all the packages and > fix them instead of waiting for the maintainers. In some cases that would work ( as in

Re: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SysVtoSystemd

On 09/06/2011 08:39 AM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > I created a service for wpa_supplicant. Is there something wrong with it? Nope Dan had sanctioned it but then another one appear upstream and as you know we try to avoid deviating from upstream. Not sure if Bill spoke with Dan about this ( I ass

Re: Transmission and Deluge sysv to systemd

On 09/07/2011 01:12 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi > > These two torrent packages includes init scripts for the daemons and > need to be converted to systemd. I have been meaning to convert but > could use some help. If someone can take a look a look and file a > patch, I will be happy to role t

Re: Transmission and Deluge sysv to systemd

On 09/07/2011 01:55 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > Yes, conversion into two separate services seems to be the most > appropriate solution. > > Here is a service file for transmission > https://github.com/eventhorizonpl/systemd-services/blob/master/transmission-daemon.service From the looks of it

Re: Transmission and Deluge sysv to systemd

On 09/07/2011 02:29 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > W dniu 7 września 2011 16:18 użytkownik Michał Piotrowski > napisał: >> 2011/9/7 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": >>> On 09/07/2011 01:55 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: >>>> Yes, conversion into two separate ser

Re: Transmission and Deluge sysv to systemd

On 09/07/2011 03:04 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 09/07/2011 08:20 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: >> (I would prefer dropping sysconfig file altogether, like Lennart >> suggested some time ago. And few other. It should work with only >> ExecStart= and User= in [Service]). > I am fine with dropping the sy

Re: Transmission and Deluge sysv to systemd

On 09/07/2011 03:06 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 09/07/2011 03:04 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> On 09/07/2011 08:20 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: >>> (I would prefer dropping sysconfig file altogether, like Lennart >>> suggested some time ago. An

Re: submitters +1ing their own packages

On 09/08/2011 06:27 PM, Till Maas wrote: > On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 01:16:50PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> I don't think a maintainer can realistically replace wide-spread user >> based testing in a variety of environments. In light of that, we can >> either accept a maintainer +1 as "I tested this

Kudos to Tom "Spot" Callaway

On behalf of the systemd convertion team Just wanted to say thanks to Tom "Spot" Callaway he's been on fire today packaging submitted unit files and shipping them. Your work did not go unoticed! JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/lis

Re: Review request: Apache Traffic Server

On 09/13/2011 10:46 AM, Jan-Frode Myklebust wrote: > Could someone please help review the Apache Traffic Server: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683463 > > I believe it should be more or less complete as far as I see it, > but the current reviewer doesn't have time to complete

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/13/2011 11:03 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > Hi > > 2011/9/13 Tom Lane: >> (This isn't new with 9.1, btw --- the last version or so of 9.0 >> for F16 was the same, since we switched over to native systemd >> files.) > I used this service file on F15 and it starts slower >4214ms postgresql

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/14/2011 10:56 AM, Steve Clark wrote: Thats right! Just wave your hands and say it is all ok that systemd is slower now but it is doing so much more and we will make it better in the future...! I never said that what I said was it's irrelivent the startup time of a service on a service

Re: [systemd-devel] question

On 09/14/2011 11:50 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 09/14/2011 05:13 PM, Genes MailLists wrote >> I realize, but that was indeed part of the point of my reply - lets >> avoid making up things (with or without hyperbole) - and best we can, >> stick to facts and real issues. > You are ignoring the r

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/14/2011 02:22 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > Is systemd boot actually any faster? There seems to be no > noticable difference in boot times for me over whatever we > were using in F14. ie. both methods still takes ages, far > longer than should be necessary. We arent optimising the defaul

Re: [systemd-devel] question

On 09/14/2011 12:35 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 14.09.2011 14:16, schrieb "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": >> And FYI to all those that gloriously want to upgrade and claim that it's >> bug free or "they" ( all of what two people ) not encountered any issues

Re: [systemd-devel] question

On 09/14/2011 10:32 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > I'd like to note that Toshio (abadger1999 on IRC) did in fact not say > this. It was someone else answering them. Oh no he would never in fact Toshio has been one of the more helpful person to me always and he is one of the person I look for inspiratio

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/15/2011 05:25 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >In general, there are other factors coming into play, such as parallel > startup using more memory, parallelization not providing many advantages > on systems with a small number of CPU cores, hard synchronisation points > in the bootup process, po

Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?

On 09/15/2011 04:11 PM, Michal Schmidt wrote: > On 09/15/2011 05:54 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> On 09/15/2011 09:42 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: >>> On 09/15/2011 05:25 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >>>> Anyway, some more figures: On the same machine, boo

Re: how to make systemd wait for a process to die?

On 09/19/2011 11:25 AM, Juan Orti Alcaine wrote: > [Service] > WorkingDirectory=/var/lib/gogoc > Type=simple > EnvironmentFile=-/etc/sysconfig/gogoc > ExecStart=/usr/bin/gogoc -f /etc/gogoc/gogoc.conf $GOGOC_OPTS > ExecStop=/bin/kill -s SIGHUP $MAINPID Try this totally untested instead... [Servic

Re: Looking for dnssec-triggerd alpha testers!

On 09/21/2011 10:21 AM, Adam Tkac wrote: > Another argument for enforcing DNSSEC is that in future (well, I believe > :) ) DNS will be used as storage for X.509 certs, SSHFP records and > other stuff. If we adopt "leisure" approach (automatic disabling of > DNSSEC or ability to "click" somewhere o

Re: Looking for dnssec-triggerd alpha testers!

On 09/21/2011 01:00 PM, Tomas Mraz wrote: > You probably did not understand the meaning of "removing the ability for > disabling dnssec" in the Adam's e-mail. It is not meant to disable the > ability to not use of dnssec completely but that it should not be > possible to simply click away any failu

Re: Looking for dnssec-triggerd alpha testers!

If people are testing this it would be good if they could test the unit files for this too on F15+ hosts. Afaik I have already converted the whole xelerance.com stuff and it's just laying there in bugzilla. Create the relevant files in there relevant paths then run... systemctl daemon-reload

Re: Fedora 16 beta vice Knoppix

On 10/05/2011 02:41 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > You can try rebuilding your live image with this patch to > spin-kickstarts: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739446 > > to see if it makes any difference. it migrates the livesys stuff to > systemd, at least to an extent. > -- Migra

Re: systemd and mounting filesystems

On 10/05/2011 08:55 AM, Steven Whitehouse wrote: > Ok, excellent, so there is really just one issue to try and resolve in > that case I think, which is the ordering of mounts vs. gfs_controld > start, Hum... Could that be solved either by creating mount/path units ( for the mount point ) and or

Re: Fwd: TFTP stopped working on F14

On 10/07/2011 03:38 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: Hi, I think this is a development problem. I have tried everything obvious to get TFTP to work on F14 but to no avail. Could some one in the know look in to this please. I have tftp -server working on F14 and have done PXE Instillations using it. Si

Re: Fwd: TFTP stopped working on F14

On 10/07/2011 05:00 PM, Aaron Gray wrote: > Transfer timed out. Usually one needs full output from the above but anyway check the usual stuff as in your /etc/xinet.d/tftp file and make sure it's not disabled as in "disable = yes", file permissions etc... JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists

Re: Systemd unit file: Can/Should ExecStart and ExecStop run a script?

On 10/19/2011 06:43 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > It looks like I'll be taking over mythtv packaging for RPM Fusion and > I noticed it still only uses a sysv init script. > > In the sysv script it sets some ACL permissions on video and audio > devices necessary for the backend service, and then on shut

Re: Systemd unit file: Can/Should ExecStart and ExecStop run a script?

On 10/19/2011 09:48 PM, Richard Shaw wrote: > That will work for the user, however, I was also going to allow for > additional options from the sysconfig file, but $OPTIONS wasn't being > expand either. sysconfig files for daemons kinda is obsolete these days either write the daemon to parse a co

Re: Systemd unit file: Can/Should ExecStart and ExecStop run a script?

On 10/19/2011 08:29 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > The After=syslog.target is unnecessary these days and should be removed > to keep things simple. If you expect upstream to ship unit files then you must realize that upstream needs to ship a unit file that works across distribution on what eve

Re: Systemd conversion versus updates in back Fedora branches

On 10/24/2011 03:52 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > I'm really getting to the point where that's a completely unacceptable > restriction. I've already blown off one mysql bug-fix release in F15 > because of this restriction, and I see they just released another one > that I'll be unable to ship in F15 becau

Re: Systemd conversion versus updates in back Fedora branches

On 10/24/2011 05:42 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > FWIW, what the tomcat6 maintainers did is that they just ignored the > guideline which says that you cannot migrate to systemd in an update and > pushed this update: > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2011-13456 > (which is already in the

Re: Rethinking proventester and critpath

On 11/01/2011 01:59 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > So, assuming I'm not grossly misanalysing the data, it seems that we > could drop the proventester requirement from critical path updates with > a negligable change in the quality of the updates. Thoughts? Agreed flag it as tried and tested stats do

Re: convert init.d to systemd, how to determine which python is installed

On 11/03/2011 02:38 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 10:10 -0400, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: >> HekaFS runs a daemon from init. It's a Bottle (python-based) http server. >> >> In order to work on, e.g. RHEL6 in addition to Fedora, the old init >> script has: >> ... >> vercmd="from dist

Re: What's this /run directory doing on my system and where does it come from?

On 04/01/2011 03:32 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> So, now I am a violent crack addicted rapist in your eyes. I am curious >> > what adjectives you think of next. > Well, PC prohibits to pronounce what I actually think of your works. I'm not sure what is the cause for this hatred you seem to have b

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 15 Beta RC1 Available Now!

On 04/08/2011 06:11 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Dennis Gilmore said: >> Chris its the teminology we have always used. >> each phase has a series of release candidates. > I thought they were called "test composes" or TC, not RC. I dont see any reason why we cant use TC if RC is caus

Re: Systemd unit file implementation questions (ypbind)

On 04/13/2011 05:55 PM, Honza Horak wrote: > Hi, > > I'm working on systemd unit file for ypbind and found some problems, > that I'm not sure about: It would be good if maintainers could take their time and assign themselves to their components here [1] if they have the time to convert old sysv

Re: Systemd unit file implementation questions (ypbind)

On 04/13/2011 09:17 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:00:18PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> On Wed, 13.04.11 22:55, Miloslav Trmač (m...@volny.cz) wrote: >> >>> 2011/4/13 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson": >>>> It would be good i

Re: Systemd unit file implementation questions (ypbind)

> Is there a good solution for this? Which service ( file ) is this. I can take a look at to see which way is best to approach it. JBG -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: Systemd unit file implementation questions (ypbind)

On 04/14/2011 09:14 AM, Michal Hlavinka wrote: > Is there a good solution for this? The right solution is to split this into three service files as I have done in bug 696611 then simply run systemctl start/stop/restart/reload/enable upsd-master.service # for master ( which start the upsd-mas

Re: Systemd unit file implementation questions (ypbind)

On 04/14/2011 12:51 PM, Michal Hlavinka wrote: > >> Can you elaborate on this? > a) ups driver - runs when you have ups attached to that host > b) upsd - runs when you have ups attached to that host > c) upsmon (master/slave mode) - usualy runs on machine where you have ups, >

Re: Systemd unit file implementation questions (ypbind)

On 04/14/2011 02:35 PM, Michal Hlavinka wrote: > If I use Requires= directive, it starts driver for upsd, but is it possible > to specify to > stop the driver when upsd stops? > I think that you would use BindTo= instead of Requires= in upsd.service ( that is if uspd is depend upon them being ru

Re: Systemd unit file implementation questions (ypbind)

On 04/14/2011 03:14 PM, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > I had such situation when I worked on shorewall scripts conversion. I > just didn't converted main shorewall-init script. At that time, I just > did not have idea how to run bash loop in systemd service:) Using bash loop within systemd is and shou

Re: Systemd unit file implementation questions (ypbind)

On 04/14/2011 03:36 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: >> In man systemd.unit >> > >> > BindTo= >> > Configures requirement dependencies, very similar in style >> > to Requires=, however in addition to this behaviour it also >> > declares that this unit is stopped when

Re: Systemd unit file implementation questions (ypbind)

On 04/14/2011 04:19 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: >> /etc/sysconfig/xxx is mostly a Fedora/Red Hat idiom. I am pretty sure >> > the Debian version of the boot scripts do not honour this request. >Debian has mostly identical /etc/default/xxx. > Perhaps the same team that look at /run changes can com

Re: F15 and Broadcom BCM4313

On 04/27/2011 02:21 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 04:03:16PM +0200, Jos Vos wrote: > >> > - Can I get this chip working (as a test) using the Live USB-stick, so >> > that I can verify the correct working without actually installing >> > Fedora on the disk? (Wired

Re: informations about boot sequence (Re: F15 - mysql start problem)

rk application downstream might be using. In addition to the above any arguments surrounding "boot time" or dynamic roaming network of somekind are also irrelvent in this case since I have yet to meet the sysadmin that a) cares about shaving few seconds of his blades or bricks at boot up

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >