Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

nixos/systemd: add upstreamSystemWants option #3106

Conversation

offlinehacker
Copy link
Contributor

We need this for some lxc implementation like libcontainer docker, to disable uneeded targets, which fail at boot time.

@wmertens
Copy link
Contributor

👍

@edolstra
Copy link
Member

What exactly fails? I don't want to add options to work around bugs.

@offlinehacker
Copy link
Contributor Author

It's not problem only the failure(well yeah mounting of few kernel
filesystems fails), it's just that i don't want to start everything in
lightweight docker containers. More speciffically i don't need sysinit
target.

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Eelco Dolstra notifications@github.com
wrote:

What exactly fails? I don't want to add options to work around bugs.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#3106 (comment).

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

mQENBFEY1PEBCADPOfERF2wo4qeoq9L1m2z4pKfWqNd4B6BsoFUWPNd7BXmY+9JG
jJddSkmYobWec7XjAFTBL0Xbttt+rK9SIED2dCOmU1FYMQElhGlM3PNA3kaiQFeV
ijgH318GCfZzDd0dWa5TN/IshVeWXwgngsIEmZTVf1VSeb3eO3B8Fxe3zsSLUq0b
71MmU5eLVP9pMkm5V5BTYp+lV70FIekKygkKq+uTDo1csWUatbs4Qvgv37Bymy2t
oTwOBXGoinQk5N/6asR1jWs3vKv0L0SruoZy/kEG/jXb4l2OZUP85EVMganYKouE
OchVmcmhBdWV+t3HK4r2ATfyEcMRzvzSflA1ABEBAAG0Jkpha2EgSHVkb2tsaW4g
PGpha2FodWRva2xpbkBnbWFpbC5jb20+iQE+BBMBAgAoBQJRGNTxAhsDBQkB4TOA
BgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRD6Zxi5hZclKnXNCACLOKa8abQp
eTWv9SXUwC7LVM5pP2mXcgn+Ipqr6YWBdLx4Iij0YlvUok9VeKvwTpUlT+cx++o3
wCM3AYrUyJE+zrtw49lInUmutz9seqJLU895oq+D+UuGoORrLBpEZrYR5f83uUmQ
E3Z1ZmWrNGXYtITWDtVZD/KauMF2nkPcmy/XaYXhd4WHD81DGNlKtGAHig6A3Phc
8Mr0A4yLDeRQJm8lCFEsxMJUNTupgY+ybbsMfVGx1gQvvGOTioV8CLCoRchUCCcm
YPArFg40KzIDSNjwdo9EVZDnlPx1hbOppfQydxP+JVnZsqoYmVY4UhIWi/NfOl3V
UMjl338INW1zuQENBFEY1PEBCADRSIfelOMjaTH7IfpMFFUc5Gys//njFnW9QAUg
wyfs2AFxUp6vKQ7nxXQiJXVhKTwe9iqo+oGxaHp4AeTjC7vXsfMuF5g5lfttbAo3
YEobEe6OG5so41nbwan6SyeIIQ2AmQqJBw8TKKMSec2qUN0Pw7iZRs0o9uJM/obG
DPsAsMOQgNLxJyMCP7X2jBtDXxkMFVHMmk50Tl3h3Fi9qWuNxgTXjs0tUvKkXiu2
Pco952jnm7HpCIKBek2pqR/UJXXb5qxy5G6Lc0qaMWZ5GKnSMTJmTY6Xl44EnaLK
zh0rqgF9qpoWck470ZbiGASMtB008hy2l0cyxUfvDaS3tY4hABEBAAGJASUEGAEC
AA8FAlEY1PECGwwFCQHhM4AACgkQ+mcYuYWXJSoT6AgAkvzvC0EGmeCR3cn9O3Gf
yG00Kqk9/1gJvlphis7AAce8iUgU+4xd94Vp0u8rghpdy88xKN5lF1W2YZQmmBaf
AVe6b7TOg6kxc3GKkVsWDxNyQKkpB46BwefIGaSljH7502X9aEWosrqWyJJNYCtt
QDit4BysX0Ww3Ka5Rx6ZFhC9ybPKoW2i8JwpyBaXDt7R2k+PC/ClBf9qzL+sb2es
zh/zCMVKNdm8KUITHU/5lgn2qZpUFZwiASPCMGGFP9u8g6UKeUTYTPD+GWaHIW63
RAgNIAffxx0M1r3P/2ipkAdI3NX/1iBKDQNG8Odsf+BswFKrNCnyUDdLPvJAhODS
gw==
=tmrm
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

@edolstra
Copy link
Member

But targets don't do anything except pull in other units. What units/services specifically don't you want?

@offlinehacker
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ok i see, so specifically:

"dev-hugepages.mount"
"dev-mqueue.mount"
"proc-sys-fs-binfmt_misc.mount"
"sys-fs-fuse-connections.mount"
"sys-kernel-config.mount"
"sys-kernel-debug.mount"

@7c6f434c
Copy link
Member

@edolstra So, are you OK with this customisation possibility?

@Fuuzetsu Fuuzetsu added the 6.topic: nixos Issues or PRs affecting NixOS modules, or package usability issues specific to NixOS label Sep 21, 2014
@Fuuzetsu
Copy link
Member

Ping

@7c6f434c
Copy link
Member

@edolstra is there any drawback in merging this? Apparently is just adds a configuration option with the same default as before, so net win?

@edolstra
Copy link
Member

Again, I don't see the point in an option to disable units that systemd won't even try to start anyway.

If there actually are mount units that fail then they apparently lack a Condition to prevent them from being started, which should be fixed.

@7c6f434c
Copy link
Member

@offlinehacker do you think that what @edolstra says is a better fix?

@offlinehacker
Copy link
Contributor Author

You can close this issus. Docker was not ment for running whole os(well you
can, but besides testing, you are doing something wrong), but for running
single processes.
On Nov 13, 2014 10:43 AM, "Michael Raskin" notifications@github.com wrote:

@offlinehacker https://github.com/offlinehacker do you think that what
@edolstra https://github.com/edolstra says is a better fix?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#3106 (comment).

@7c6f434c 7c6f434c closed this Nov 13, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
6.topic: nixos Issues or PRs affecting NixOS modules, or package usability issues specific to NixOS
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants