!DBFhtjpqmJNENpLDOv:nixos.org

NixOS systemd

613 Members
NixOS ❤️ systemd173 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
5 Mar 2025
@k900:0upti.meK900I don't think that's how it works13:22:30
@k900:0upti.meK900/run should win13:22:32
@qyliss:fairydust.spaceAlyssa RossYou'd think so13:24:45
@qyliss:fairydust.spaceAlyssa RossThat would be the sensible and intuitive design13:25:11
@eliasp:kde.orgeliasp

From the docs:

Drop-in files in /etc/ take precedence over those in /run/ which in turn take precedence over those in /usr/lib/.

13:31:11
@eliasp:kde.orgeliasp But looking at the table in "Unit File Load Path", it might be possible to use /run/systemd/transient instead… 13:33:29
@eliasp:kde.orgeliasp unfortunately, systemctl edit doesn't understand --transient, so this has to be handled manually…
but we might want to rework the patch 0016-systemctl-edit-suggest-systemdctl-edit-runtime-on-sy.patch pointing people towards --runtime
13:35:35
@rvdp:infosec.exchangeRamses 🇵🇸Yeah, I ran into this in the past as well, /etc takes priority over /run, unfortunately. I didn't know about the transient stuff15:26:12
@rvdp:infosec.exchangeRamses 🇵🇸I don't think you're supposed to use the transient stuff for this, I think it's what's used by systemd-run15:27:44
@sandro:supersandro.deSandro 🐧Would anyone be willing to help me figure out how to combine the two glitchtip services and the glitchtip.socket so that they all reside under /run/glitchtip and don't delete the socket on themselves and restarting one doesn't leave the socket missing? I tried copying from paperless but it doesn't fully work yet. https://github.com/SuperSandro2000/nixpkgs/commit/f1bb998afa34c6fa46236370d72c1d1904a41f3415:52:13
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianDont. You shouldn't put sockets in RuntimeDirectory16:02:26
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianSockets go in /run (top-level)16:02:32
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianRuntimeDirectory is private to the service. A socket is per definition something to be shared. Don't put it in RuntimeDirectory 16:03:05
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianThere is RuntimeDirectoryPreserve as a workaround16:03:33
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianBut usually it's the wrong choice to put a socket managed by a .socket. In a directory managed by a .service16:03:53
@sandro:supersandro.deSandro 🐧Also bad eg: you cannot bind mount them then because on restart the bind mount breaks16:04:30
@sandro:supersandro.deSandro 🐧it works for paperless already, so I guess it cannot be to bad16:04:50
@sandro:supersandro.deSandro 🐧I don't think I want that tbh 😅16:05:02
@arianvp:matrix.orgArian yeh don’t :D 16:11:07
@arianvp:matrix.orgArian I’d suggest always putting a socket in /run/servicename.sock 16:11:19
@sandro:supersandro.deSandro 🐧How does it then work with permissions?16:17:48
@sandro:supersandro.deSandro 🐧also on my system I have one socket there which is a symlink to somewhere else16:17:58
@adam:robins.wtf@adam:robins.wtfthe socket unit can specify permissions, no?16:32:03
@sandro:supersandro.deSandro 🐧yeah, sometimes, but often they are the equivalent of 77716:35:08
@arianvp:matrix.orgArian

SockerUser and SocketMode.

But usually unix domain sockets use SO_PEERCRED to figure out the user of the caller and make decisions on that

21:14:21
@sandro:supersandro.deSandro 🐧🤔 hmmmm22:57:21
@sandro:supersandro.deSandro 🐧Do you have an idea if common things like Gunicorn or such application servers use that?22:57:34
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianNo idea. 23:09:07
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianWhy don't you just use SocketUser and SocketMode ?23:09:32
@arianvp:matrix.orgArianIf there isn't more than one user consuming the socket 23:09:49

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6