Re: [HEADS-UP] systemd for F14 - the next steps

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/14/2010 10:58 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Lennart Poettering (mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx) said: 
>> Since the acceptance by FESCO it has been added to Rawhide together with
>> patched or updated versions of a few related packages. However, what has
>> not been done so far is making it the default in Rawhide. So far it does
>> not "Obsolete" Upstart yet, just "Conflicts" with it. With this mail I
>> want to notify everybody that I am planning to do this change very soon
>> now (tomorrow?). Then, systemd will be pulled in onto your rawhide
>> system and is used exclusively for booting (so far, you can still choose
>> between it and upstart in grub, with a default on upstart), and problems
>> booting should be reported to systemd in rhbz then.
> 
> This seems a little backwards. If we want to support both, then we need
> to just leave it as 'Conflicts', and we'll just flip the default in
> comps. By marking it as 'Obsoletes', you effectively make it impossible
> to still boot with upstart, as it will be removed in any yum update.
> 
>> d) There's one thing that is not directly related to systemd but which
>> I'd really like to see done at the same time: moving /var/lock and
>> /var/run to tmpfs, like suse and ubuntu already did it. The changes
>> necessary should be small, but probably in a non-trivial number of
>> packages: each mention of /var/run in the .spec files needs to be
>> %ghosted. Also, some minimal changes to rc.sysinit need to be done, so
>> that the dirs are mounted (this could be done by systemd too, in case we
>> get the sysinit split hhoyer started to work on done before
>> F14). Finally, there might be a few packages which start to act confused
>> if their directories beneath /var/run is go away on reboot. But these
>> problems should already have been fixed by the Ubuntuans and Suses of
>> this world for us. It would be really great if somebody would volunteer
>> for this and go through the packages to add %ghost everywhere and ensure
>> otherwise this works out. The ubuntu and suse folks might have some
>> docs around with more ideas about this.
> 
> I suspect the biggest issue here is confined daemons, as they may
> not have permissions to create their own directories in /var/run or
> /var/lock once they've been started. Unfortunately, it's the sort of
> flag day that we really can't do unless everything in our tree is fixed.
> 
> Bill

Are you talking about mounting shm at /var/run and /var/lock?  SELinux
should be able to handle this.  But you have a big spec file problem.

rpm -qf /var/run/* | grep -v not | wc
     61      61    1853

Lots of directories owned by packages.

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux