Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Systemd 230 Released

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Systemd 230 Released

    Phoronix: Systemd 230 Released

    A new release of systemd is available this weekend...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...d-230-Released

  • #2
    Is this bug fixed in 230 or not?

    https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/1615

    Comment


    • #3
      thanks man for pointing that bug out. even after so much development systemd is still facing these silly bugs

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by sarfarazahmad View Post
        thanks man for pointing that bug out. even after so much development systemd is still facing these silly bugs
        I wouldn't call it silly, reading through the comments on that bug it looks like 90-seconds is the timeout for hung processes during shutdown. The "fix" is to figure out what program isn't exitting cleanly and fix it TO exit cleanly. Many comments are saying it could be Chrom(e/ium).
        Last edited by Ericg; 05-22-2016, 01:58 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Ericg View Post

          I wouldn't call it silly, reading through the comments on that bug it looks like 90-seconds is the timeout for hung processes during shutdown. The "fix" is to figure out what program isn't editting cleanly and fix it TO exit cleanly. Many comments are saying it could be Chrom(e/ium).
          Herm... dates on my latest Chrome upgrade seems to correlate with the last time had issues with the bug. Interesting.

          Comment


          • #6
            that bugs happens as a result of NetworkManager for me. CIFS mounts should be done with fstab.

            Comment


            • #7
              How on earth this is a systemd bug when another program is not exiting cleanly

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
                How on earth this is a systemd bug when another program is not exiting cleanly
                would it make sense to say that the 90s timeout is a little too much ?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by sarfarazahmad View Post
                  would it make sense to say that the 90s timeout is a little too much ?
                  I would disagree. I would say 90s is WAY to little. Just imagine some porgram doing a sync in the background (ownCloud client) and then you end up with a broken file jsut because it took more than 90s. No, this should be fixed in the programs because different programms have to deal different with this. Lowering the 90s, in my eyes, would only mask the problem and cause problems.

                  BTW, this seems to be a real problem in the linux space. The notion that you just plaster over issues instead of fixing them is something we should be very careful about as it causes tons of problems in the log run.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Ericg View Post

                    I wouldn't call it silly, reading through the comments on that bug it looks like 90-seconds is the timeout for hung processes during shutdown. The "fix" is to figure out what program isn't exitting cleanly and fix it TO exit cleanly. Many comments are saying it could be Chrom(e/ium).
                    I thought it was the responsibility of init to tell DE to exit and the responsibility of DE to teardown GUI applications. There's no bug there imo if systemd waits 90 seconds for DE to terminate apps gracefully

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X