On 20/07/16 14:29, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 20/07/16 14:23, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> But I think you need to be more careful with your use of language.
>> `Disingenuous' implies dishonesty.
> The way I've heard it used implies a level of pretense, not necessarily
> dishonesty -- i.e., pretending that
Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] tools: remove systemd
xenstore socket definitions"):
> However, calling what previously exists WRT xenstored stubdomains as
> "supported" is laughable. The lack of integration meant that anyone
> trying to
On 20/07/16 14:23, Ian Jackson wrote:
> But I think you need to be more careful with your use of language.
> `Disingenuous' implies dishonesty.
The way I've heard it used implies a level of pretense, not necessarily
dishonesty -- i.e., pretending that stubdom xenstored was a usable
option when it
On 20/07/16 14:32, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 20/07/16 13:08, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] tools: remove systemd
>> xenstore socket definitions"):
>>> On 20/07/16 12:12, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>>> To be clear:
On 20/07/16 14:11, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ross Lagerwall writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] tools: remove systemd
> xenstore socket definitions"):
>> Nevertheless, I feel that this patch series makes the implementation
>> worse for users of xenstored as a daemon:
>
On 20/07/16 13:08, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] tools: remove systemd
> xenstore socket definitions"):
>> On 20/07/16 12:12, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> To be clear: I don't want to avoid systemd by any means. I just
On 20/07/16 14:08, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] tools: remove systemd
> xenstore socket definitions"):
>> On 20/07/16 12:12, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> To be clear: I don't want to avoid systemd by any means. I just
Ross Lagerwall writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] tools: remove systemd
xenstore socket definitions"):
> Nevertheless, I feel that this patch series makes the implementation
> worse for users of xenstored as a daemon:
>
> - Because Type=oneshot is not intended to be use
Andrew Cooper writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] tools: remove systemd
xenstore socket definitions"):
> On 20/07/16 12:12, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > To be clear: I don't want to avoid systemd by any means. I just don't
> > want to have a complex and ugly
On 20/07/16 13:21, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 20/07/16 12:12, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 20/07/16 12:52, George Dunlap wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 20/07/16 11:02, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
> On 06/29/2016 02:44 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 29/06/1
On 20/07/16 12:12, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 20/07/16 12:52, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> On 20/07/16 11:02, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
On 06/29/2016 02:44 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 29/06/16 15:31, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
>> On 06/29/
On 20/07/16 12:52, George Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 20/07/16 11:02, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
>>> On 06/29/2016 02:44 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 29/06/16 15:31, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
> On 06/29/2016 02:00 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 2
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 20/07/16 11:02, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
>> On 06/29/2016 02:44 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> On 29/06/16 15:31, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
On 06/29/2016 02:00 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 2
On 20/07/16 11:02, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
> On 06/29/2016 02:44 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 29/06/16 15:31, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
>>> On 06/29/2016 02:00 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> @@ -2068,13 +1964,6
On 06/29/2016 02:44 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 29/06/16 15:31, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
On 06/29/2016 02:00 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
@@ -2068,13 +1964,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
/* Tell the kernel we
On 29/06/16 15:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 29/06/16 15:31, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
>> On 06/29/2016 02:00 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
> @@ -2068,13 +1964,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> /* Tel
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 02:32:31PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 08/07/16 14:15, Wei Liu wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 03:00:41PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> >> On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >>> On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
> @@ -2068,13 +1964,6 @@ int main(int
On 08/07/16 14:15, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 03:00:41PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
@@ -2068,13 +1964,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
/* Tell the kernel we're up and running. */
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 03:00:41PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
> >> @@ -2068,13 +1964,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> >>/* Tell the kernel we're up and running. */
> >>xenbus_notify_running();
> >>
On 29/06/16 15:31, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
> On 06/29/2016 02:00 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
@@ -2068,13 +1964,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
/* Tell the kernel we're up and running. */
On 06/29/2016 02:00 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
@@ -2068,13 +1964,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
/* Tell the kernel we're up and running. */
xenbus_notify_running();
-#if defined(XEN_SYSTEMD_ENA
On 29/06/16 14:52, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> @@ -2068,13 +1964,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> /* Tell the kernel we're up and running. */
>> xenbus_notify_running();
>>
>> -#if defined(XEN_SYSTEMD_ENABLED)
>> -if (systemd) {
>> -
On 29/06/16 13:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
> @@ -2068,13 +1964,6 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> /* Tell the kernel we're up and running. */
> xenbus_notify_running();
>
> -#if defined(XEN_SYSTEMD_ENABLED)
> - if (systemd) {
> - sd_notify(1, "READY=1");
> -
On a system with systemd the xenstore sockets are created via systemd.
Remove the related configuration files in order to be able to decide
at runtime whether the sockets should be created or not. This will
enable Xen to start xenstore either via a daemon or via a stub domain.
Signed-off-by: Juerg
24 matches
Mail list logo
