[systemd-devel] [PATCH] rules: rerun vconsole-setup when switching from vgacon to fbcon

[Ivan Shapovalov]

On Friday 07 November 2014 at 16:45:02, Lennart Poettering wrote:	
> On Fri, 07.11.14 17:45, Ivan Shapovalov (intelfx100 at gmail.com) wrote:
> 
> > On Thursday 06 November 2014 at 11:02:44, David Herrmann wrote:	
> > > Hi Ray
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 10:40 AM, David Herrmann <dh.herrmann at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Ray Strode <halfline at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> So if you have no idea how to make that rule be generated only if
> > > >>> ENABLE_VCONSOLE is set by configure, then we probably should take my
> > > >>> patch below.
> > > >> Your patch seems far better than the options above, but I think it
> > > >> needs a dracut patch to make sure the new rules file gets in the
> > > >> initrd too, or it won't work.
> > > >
> > > > I will push the patch to systemd and let Harald know. I'm not really
> > > > familiar with dracut..
> > > 
> > > Pushed.
> > 
> > Isn't it ugly to re-runn systemd-vconsole-setup straight from an udev rule?
> > I mean, udev has a tendency to kill long-running RUN processes, and I've seen
> > systemd-vconsole-setup.service to take >5 seconds on some systems...
> > Also, these additional systemd-vconsole-setup instances aren't supervised by
> > systemd...
> 
> Is systemd-vconsole-setup really long-running? Why would it need that
> long?
> 
> To me it appears to be quite OK to be run inside a udev rule.

Well, maybe it is OK to be run from an udev rule, but it is still an
inconsistency between running that binary on boot (via a unit) and
running the same binary when a framebuffer console is added (directly)...

-- 
Ivan Shapovalov / intelfx /
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 213 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/attachments/20141201/0ed6f081/attachment.sig>