September 2012 - openSUSE Factory - openSUSE Mailing Lists

Re: [opensuse-factory] [RFC] sysvinit: plan B
by Frederic Crozat 24 Sep '12

24 Sep '12

Le dimanche 23 septembre 2012 à 06:23 +0200, Jan Engelhardt a écrit : > On Friday 2012-09-07 15:43, Michal Vyskocil wrote > [http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2012-09/msg00396.html]: > > > >Name: vsftpd-sysv > >Description: Sysvinit script for vsftpd > >Supplements: packagageand(sysvinit:vsftpd) > >Requires: sysvinit > >Requires: vsftpd > >Source0: vsftpd.init > > It would seem more advantageous to change the systemd package, and > provide an extra binary there that reuses the parser code to > give users the possibility to start/stop/restart programs using > unit files in a non-systemd environment. > . First, I don't see the point of doing a separate package at all for sysvinit compatibility. Second, if people want to use .service, they should use systemd. I don't want us to spend time in doing some strange backport from one new technology to another one when plan to drop. -- Frederic Crozat <fcrozat(a)suse.com> SUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 1

[opensuse-factory] New package submitted : apache2-mod_pagespeed
by Robert Munteanu 23 Sep '12

23 Sep '12

Hi, I've submitted sr#134135 [1] to Apache:Modules . mod_pagespeed [2] identifies improvements that can be made to web-sites to improve their latency in an Apache server. HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and images are changed dynamically during the web serving process, so that the best practices recommended by Page Speed can be used without having to change the way the web site is maintained. This apache module shares a common codebase with multiple Google products which are related to web site optimisation, such as: - PageSpeed insights ( https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights ) - PageSpeed service ( https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/service ) I think this package will bring value to the distribution by allowing web application deployers to easily optimise the ouptut for the websites they host. I for one have found it quite valuable, especially when dealing with unoptimized websites. Thanks, Robert [1]: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/134135 [2]: http://code.google.com/p/modpagespeed/ -- Sent from my (old) computer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[opensuse-factory] libotr
by Nelson Marques 23 Sep '12

23 Sep '12

I'm submitting an update to libotr; anyone has contrainsts with updating it to 4.0.0 ? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[opensuse-factory] help! axe off contributions from one of my projects
by Nelson Marques 23 Sep '12

23 Sep '12

People, I'm being flooded with emails from one of my projects because of SR's; Is there a way to prevent this project from not taking SR's? It's not that I don't like, it's just that __AT__ the current time, I have other plans :) NM -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-factory] python2 or python3
by Alin M Elena 22 Sep '12

22 Sep '12

Hi, I see that the factory has both python2 and python3. Are there any plans about switching to python3 as default? I will also appreciate if the python maintainers can push=20 home:HighwayStar:branches:devel:languages:python python3-matplotlib Alin PS can we also, cripple kmail by default, or update the settings of our mailing list to accept html emails... It is bloody annoying to get your messages bounced back because of the default settings of the mail client. -- Without Questions there are no Answers! ______________________________________________________________________ Alin Marin ELENA Advanced Molecular Simulation Research Laboratory School of Physics, University College Dublin ---- Ardionsamblú Móilíneach Saotharlann Taighde Scoil na Fisice, An Coláiste Ollscoile, Baile Átha Cliath ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://alin.elenaworld.net ______________________________________________________________________ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

5 4

[opensuse-factory] usb devices not showing in kde
by Alin M Elena 21 Sep '12

21 Sep '12

Hi, I have a strange problem, all my usk storage devices do not show in kde's device notifier. I can see them fine with lsusb and mount them manually as root... but somehow I lost the nicety of easy click. any idea on what may cause it? I am tempted to blame policy-kit... but I do not have the proof. regards, Alin -- Without Questions there are no Answers! ______________________________________________________________________ Alin Marin ELENA Advanced Molecular Simulation Research Laboratory School of Physics, University College Dublin ---- Ardionsamblú Móilíneach Saotharlann Taighde Scoil na Fisice, An Coláiste Ollscoile, Baile Átha Cliath ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://alin.elenaworld.net ______________________________________________________________________ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 8

Re: Re: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.3: Drop sysinit V
by Frederic Crozat 21 Sep '12

21 Sep '12

Le vendredi 21 septembre 2012 à 13:42 +0200, Jos Poortvliet a écrit : > On Thursday, September 20, 2012 16:16:36 Frederic Crozat wrote: > > Le jeudi 20 septembre 2012 à 10:11 -0500, Larry Finger a écrit : > > > On 09/20/2012 07:20 AM, Frederic Crozat wrote: > > > > Le lundi 03 septembre 2012 à 19:13 -0500, Larry Finger a écrit : > > > >> On 09/03/2012 10:21 AM, Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a DimStar wrote: > > > >>> Hi all, > > > >>> > > > >>> I know, a radical proposal, BUT a bunch of reported issues in 12.2 are > > > >>> around systemd/sysinitV, both trying to do the same thing, > > > >>> differently. > > > >>> > > > >>> It would clearly help the distribution to commit clearly to ONE init > > > >>> system > > > >>> only, officially and formally ditching the other. > > > >>> > > > >>> This allows for proper testing of ONE Init System and fixing issues > > > >>> around it. Not having to worry for an alternative INIT System can > > > >>> only have it's advantages. > > > >>> > > > >>> (Not saying NOBODY can keep on working / integrating SysInitV, just > > > >>> saying: the openSUSE Project should focus on SystemD as the one > > > >>> supported Init System). > > > >>> > > > >>> There are a bunch of issues we could have saved ourselves from by not > > > >>> going the split way. > > > >> > > > >> One defect in the 12.1 and 12.2 implementations is that after.local is > > > >> ignored. There is an easy fix given by James McDaniel in his blog at > > > >> http://forums.opensuse.org/blogs/comments/comment549.html. This file > > > >> should be a part of any update of systemd. > > > > > > > > after.local wasn't implemented initially because I wasn't aware of this > > > > "suse-ism" when I ensured systemd was usable on openSUSE for 12.1. > > > > > > > > The other big issue with after.local is relying on $ALL virtual target > > > > which is was not possible to implement easily with a dynamic service > > > > manager, like systemd (unlike insserv which is computing static > > > > dependencies before booting). Fortunately, systemd 185 (ie not the one > > > > in 12.2 but for next openSUSE release) have a new service type, called > > > > "idle", which will be used for getty (so tty will be started only after > > > > all services had chances to write their status report) and probably for > > > > halt.local. > > > > > > > > For systemd in 12.1 or 12.2, we can't add support for after.local > > > > reliably (and I would advise people to try to write more .service files > > > > instead, adding After=... to ensure action is started at the right > > > > moment). > > > > > > Frederic, > > > > > > Welcome back. I hope that your inbox did not undo the therapeutic benefits > > > of your holiday. > > > > > > Your advice for writing more .service files is obviously correct; however, > > > that may be too steep a learning curve for many users. For most of them, > > > the file in the link I posted earlier does what they need, and we now > > > know that the next version of openSUSE will have a systemd that will > > > allow something that is akin to after.local on SystemV. > > > > Well, I re-read the after-local.service file from forum and chances are > > very high it won't do what people are expecting: it will indeed > > start /etc/init.d/after.local but it will be started at any time during > > the boot and not after all other services are started (which is what > > people are expected).. > > That's really something to find a solution for, then. Adding simple things to > this script is something 'normal' users can do and figure out (and they do). > Increasing the barrier to such things is imho bad - we've got quite a number > of users, I bet, who are on this level of proficiency with openSUSE: able to > add or remove a line to/from a shell script but not write stuff themselves. I > admittedly fall (mostly) in that category myself. As I explained in another reply in this huge thread, we should be able to handle after.local properly for 12.3 but for 12.2 (or to call after.local will probably not do what people are expecting.. -- Frederic Crozat <fcrozat(a)suse.com> SUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0

Re: [opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.3: Drop sysinit V
by Frederic Crozat 21 Sep '12

21 Sep '12

Le jeudi 20 septembre 2012 à 10:11 -0500, Larry Finger a écrit : > On 09/20/2012 07:20 AM, Frederic Crozat wrote: > > Le lundi 03 septembre 2012 à 19:13 -0500, Larry Finger a écrit : > >> On 09/03/2012 10:21 AM, Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a DimStar wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I know, a radical proposal, BUT a bunch of reported issues in 12.2 are around > >>> systemd/sysinitV, both trying to do the same thing, differently. > >>> > >>> It would clearly help the distribution to commit clearly to ONE init system > >>> only, officially and formally ditching the other. > >>> > >>> This allows for proper testing of ONE Init System and fixing issues around it. > >>> Not having to worry for an alternative INIT System can only have it's advantages. > >>> > >>> (Not saying NOBODY can keep on working / integrating SysInitV, just saying: the > >>> openSUSE Project should focus on SystemD as the one supported Init System). > >>> > >>> There are a bunch of issues we could have saved ourselves from by not going the > >>> split way. > >> > >> One defect in the 12.1 and 12.2 implementations is that after.local is ignored. > >> There is an easy fix given by James McDaniel in his blog at > >> http://forums.opensuse.org/blogs/comments/comment549.html. This file should be a > >> part of any update of systemd. > > > > after.local wasn't implemented initially because I wasn't aware of this > > "suse-ism" when I ensured systemd was usable on openSUSE for 12.1. > > > > The other big issue with after.local is relying on $ALL virtual target > > which is was not possible to implement easily with a dynamic service > > manager, like systemd (unlike insserv which is computing static > > dependencies before booting). Fortunately, systemd 185 (ie not the one > > in 12.2 but for next openSUSE release) have a new service type, called > > "idle", which will be used for getty (so tty will be started only after > > all services had chances to write their status report) and probably for > > halt.local. > > > > For systemd in 12.1 or 12.2, we can't add support for after.local > > reliably (and I would advise people to try to write more .service files > > instead, adding After=... to ensure action is started at the right > > moment). > > Frederic, > > Welcome back. I hope that your inbox did not undo the therapeutic benefits of > your holiday. > > Your advice for writing more .service files is obviously correct; however, that > may be too steep a learning curve for many users. For most of them, the file in > the link I posted earlier does what they need, and we now know that the next > version of openSUSE will have a systemd that will allow something that is akin > to after.local on SystemV. Well, I re-read the after-local.service file from forum and chances are very high it won't do what people are expecting: it will indeed start /etc/init.d/after.local but it will be started at any time during the boot and not after all other services are started (which is what people are expected).. -- Frederic Crozat <fcrozat(a)suse.com> SUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 1

[opensuse-factory] Fwd: [systemd-devel] [HEADS-UP] Early-boot SysV service support is going away
by Cristian Rodríguez 20 Sep '12

20 Sep '12

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [systemd-devel] [HEADS-UP] Early-boot SysV service support is going away Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 00:59:26 +0200 From: Lennart Poettering <lennart(a)poettering.net> Organization: Red Hat, Inc. To: systemd Mailing List <systemd-devel(a)lists.freedesktop.org> Heya, In a month or two we'll make the SysV service logic in systemd generator-based. This helps us clean up our codebase a bit and makes SysV service support an optional plugin rather than something that is built into PID1. Effectively, by doing this move very little will change in behaviour for SysV scripts, with one exception however: we will remove support for early-boot SysV scripts. Early-boot SysV scripts are those for the special "S", "boot", or "b" runlevel that exist on some distributions. These runlevels are highly distro specific, have never been really standardized and are really cumbersome to support right now with a lot of per-distribution hacks. Please do not misunderstand this: it's one thing supporting normal SysV scripts, it's another one supporting them in the early boot part of the things. The former is going to stay for a long time, the latter however is going to be removed in a couple of month. Anyway, this is basically just a heads-up about this, so that you folks who still need this can think about good solutions what to do instead. Here's what I can propose: a) port the early-boot init scripts to native systemd units. You probably should do that anyway, and in most cases there should be very little left that systemd doesn't do on its own anyway in the early-boot process. We recommend to go this way, of course. or b) Try to forward-port support for these magic runlvels to what's coming. Probably a lot of work, since due to the conversion to a generator this is a lot more work than it might appear right now. The code structure of the sysv logic will change quite substantially. or c) write an explicit generator for these services, in the specific syntax of your distro. Anyway, please think about it, we'd just like to make you aware of this in time. At least Debian, Suse, Ubuntu, Angstrom appear to be candidates where this lost functionality might be noticable. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel(a)lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 1

[opensuse-factory] Proposal for 12.3: Drop sysinit V
by Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a DimStar 20 Sep '12

20 Sep '12

Hi all, I know, a radical proposal, BUT a bunch of reported issues in 12.2 are around systemd/sysinitV, both trying to do the same thing, differently. It would clearly help the distribution to commit clearly to ONE init system only, officially and formally ditching the other. This allows for proper testing of ONE Init System and fixing issues around it. Not having to worry for an alternative INIT System can only have it's advantages. (Not saying NOBODY can keep on working / integrating SysInitV, just saying: the openSUSE Project should focus on SystemD as the one supported Init System). There are a bunch of issues we could have saved ourselves from by not going the split way. Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner(a)opensuse.org

51 291