[02:02] <[diablo]> moin moin
[02:02] <[diablo]> anyone about?
[08:15] <[diablo]> morning all
[08:15] <[diablo]> anyone about please?
[08:19] <JanC> [diablo]: if you have a question, ask it, and then stay around--if somebody knows the answer, they will answer when they are online & have time
[08:19] <[diablo]> hi JanC 
[08:19] <[diablo]> sorry, reason I asked it was dead here when I last tried
[08:19] <[diablo]> ok here goes
[08:20] <[diablo]> basically I have a problem with ubuntu 10.04 not starting qemu-kvm and libvirt-bin on boot
[08:20] <[diablo]> it only started after I changed my NIC to bridge mode
[08:20] <[diablo]> anyway.... I started looking at the rc.N ... all is set correctly..
[08:20] <[diablo]> then I checked the upstart jobs, yep.. all there
[08:21] <[diablo]> but... I want to start debugging it (upstart)
[08:21] <[diablo]> I look at man init
[08:21] <[diablo]> and I see it says in the files section at the bottom
[08:21] <[diablo]> FILES
[08:21] <[diablo]>        /etc/init.conf
[08:21] <[diablo]>        /etc/init/*.conf
[08:21] <[diablo]> but there is no /etc/init.conf file
[08:22] <[diablo]> and I want to work out the boot order of the services that upstart does on boot
[08:22] <JanC> if there is no init.conf it's not used  ;)
[08:22] <[diablo]> ohhhh
[08:22] <[diablo]> k
[08:22] <[diablo]> so, the order of the services starting???
[08:22] <JanC> so, only look in /etc/init/*.conf
[08:23] <[diablo]> nod
[08:23] <JanC> well, that depends on the scripts in that directory
[08:23] <[diablo]> ok is there a primary script, first point of execution?
[08:24] <JanC> you might want to read init(5) (run "man 5 init")
[08:25] <[diablo]> ok
[08:25] <JanC> basically, it starts services based on events
[08:26] <[diablo]> ok
[08:26] <ion> I seem to remember a known bug regarding bridge initialization in Ubuntu. You’ll probably find it on Launchpad.
[08:27] <[diablo]> JanC, the bridge is working actually
[08:27] <[diablo]> JanC, the problem is that qemu-kvm and libvirt-bin must now be started manually once the machine has booted
[08:29] <JanC> lookign at their init scripts, it seems like they should start on startup
[08:30] <JanC> well, they should start on runlevel 2, 3, 4 & 5
[08:31] <[diablo]> actually, due to faffing around with update-rc.d ... I have sysv links
[08:31] <[diablo]> I will remove them
[08:33] <[diablo]> gonna reboot the box now
[08:33] <[diablo]> and see...
[08:34] <JanC> there should be a symlink /etc/init.d/libvirt-bin -> /lib/init/upstart-job normally
[08:34] <[diablo]> nod
[08:34] <JanC> (which implements sysv-compatibility)
[08:35] <JanC> and LSB-compatibility, I suppose
[08:35] <[diablo]> nope, LSB nope
[08:35] <[diablo]> ok, just rebooted...
[08:35] <[diablo]> nada de nada ... still neither service is running
[08:36] <JanC> does your hardware support kvm?
[08:36] <[diablo]> this is weired 
[08:36] <[diablo]> yep sure does.. if I manually start the services, all is good
[08:37] <[diablo]> and previously it all worked, it was only when I changed to bridge that these two services stopped booting
[08:38] <JanC> ion: maybe try what ion said: he thinks there is a known bug about that  ;)
[08:38] <[diablo]> in the bridge-utils package ion ?
[08:38] <[diablo]> sorry, was thinking it was you (JanC) who said it
[08:39] <JanC> might be in libvirt or whatever
[08:39] <[diablo]> ok, but that should not effect qemu-kvm
[08:39] <[diablo]> as that just does a modprobe 
[08:40] <JanC> and it doesn't modprobe?
[08:40] <JanC> modules aren't loaded?
[08:40] <[diablo]> nope
[08:40] <[diablo]> but if I manually run it now
[08:41] <[diablo]> diablo@beast:~$ lsmod |grep kvm
[08:41] <[diablo]> diablo@beast:~$ sudo service qemu-kvm start
[08:41] <[diablo]> [sudo] password for diablo: 
[08:41] <[diablo]> qemu-kvm start/running
[08:41] <[diablo]> diablo@beast:~$ lsmod |grep kvm
[08:41] <[diablo]> kvm_intel              46296  0 
[08:41] <[diablo]> kvm                   286392  1 kvm_intel
[08:42] <JanC> /etc/default/qemu-kvm has "KSM_ENABLED=1" ?
[08:42] <JanC> although, that shouldn't change things on manual start
[08:43] <[diablo]> yep
[08:43] <[diablo]> enabled
[08:43] <[diablo]> it´s gotta be something with the bridge
[08:43] <ion> The bug might be against the upstart package, or even the udev package.
[08:43] <ion> or ifupdown
[08:43] <[diablo]> hi ion 
[08:44] <[diablo]> well, it only started once I changed to bridge 
[08:45] <[diablo]> will just check launchpad about what your saying ion 
[08:48] <JanC> [diablo]: maybe also ask in #ubuntu-virt and/or #ubuntu-server
[08:48] <JanC> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qemu-kvm/+bug/580454 might be the bug ion was thinking about
[08:54] <[diablo]> thanks JanC 
[08:54] <[diablo]> looks about right
[08:55] <[diablo]> well
[08:55] <[diablo]> mmm sort of
[08:55] <[diablo]> but I will just have to fire the two services up manually until a resolution is found
[08:55] <[diablo]> many thanks for you help JanC and ion 
[08:55] <[diablo]> all the best
[14:53] <hallyn> on this vostro 1220, in order to get it to respect 'auto eth1' (eth1 being broadcom sta wireless) in /etc/networks/interfaces, i had to add 'pre-up exec ifdown -a' to /etc/init/networking.conf
[15:40] <Psi-Jack> Oh cool. There's an entire channel just for upstart eh?
[15:43] <Psi-Jack> Anyway. I'm trying to learn about upstart, and the documentation for it, is minimal at best so far that I can see. What I'm trying to work with now is respawn and limit. If I understand it right, basically by using respawn, a watchdog tracks the process and respawns it should it tie by abnormal means without using upstart process control, correct?
[15:47] <mbiebl> Psi-Jack:  upstart (/sbin/init) tracks the process
[15:47] <Psi-Jack> Right. :)
[15:48] <Psi-Jack> So if I flagged respawn on, for example, my keepalived upstart-job, and I killall -9 keepalived, upstart should respawn it basically correct?
[15:49] <ion> Yep
[15:49] <Psi-Jack> How's the limit definition work?
[15:50] <ion> See init(5)
[15:51] <Psi-Jack> Well, that doesn't show much at all.
[15:51] <Psi-Jack> Ahh wait. ;)
[15:55] <Psi-Jack> Now that, makes a lot more sense. ;)
[15:56] <Psi-Jack> With upstart supervising a process, say, keepalived, which I setup so that conntrackd and ipvsadm are linked with keepalived's starting and stopping events, if I killed keepalived abnormally, would conntrackd ad ipvsadm follow with it, or would they remain running?
[15:57] <ion> I think they’ll be restarted when keepalived is respawned, but better check that for yourself.
[15:58] <Psi-Jack> Hmm. I'm testing it now, before adding the respawn part to it, just to see what happends.
[16:26] <Psi-Jack> There is one thing that has me boggled a bit, though.
[16:26] <Psi-Jack> When I was making an upstart job for ipvsadm, I had some issues.
[16:27] <Psi-Jack> I ended up having to use pre-start script and post-stop script so it wouldn't actually try to track the process itself, but what happends when I start ipvsadm otherwise, it loads it as [ipvsadm_syncmaster] and/or [ipvsadm_syncbackup], instead of as a normal process.
[16:27] <Psi-Jack> upstart fails to keep track of that it seems.
[16:30] <Psi-Jack> So, is it possible somehow to get an upstart job to basically track a kernel process thread, rather than a normal process daemon or fork?
[16:30] <neal> I'm trying to write an upstart job for Maemo 5 (upstart version 0.3.8).  My program forks into the background.  It seems that this means upstart doesn't know how to find its pid and kill it.  (stop ...)  Should I use pre-stop and kill it manually?
[16:31] <Psi-Jack> neal: expect fork
[16:31] <Psi-Jack> If it forks out 1 process, expect fork. If it daemonizes and runs 3 processes, expect daemon
[16:31] <neal> I thought that was only 0.5.0+
[16:31] <Psi-Jack> Oh.
[16:31] <Psi-Jack> hmm. Maybe. ;)
[16:31] <Psi-Jack> Upgrade time. ;0
[16:32] <neal> this is Maemo 5
[16:32] <neal> I can't.
[16:32] <Psi-Jack> There is only do, or do not, there is no can't.
[16:32] <neal> sure.
[16:32] <neal> Any other suggestions?
[16:33] <Psi-Jack> I personally only know more of the newer stuff about upstart, so I have nothing.
[16:33] <Psi-Jack> without the advancements upstart's gone, I probably wouldn't be using it like I am now.
[16:39] <Psi-Jack> Personally, I'm curious how well the cron-like advancements are coming." :)
[16:47] <ion> Perhaps with 0.10, which should be released for Ubuntu 10.10 if all goes well.
[16:48] <Psi-Jack> That soon eh?
[16:48] <Psi-Jack> Well, it'll probably be a while till I switch off 10.04. Probably end up sticking with it till the next LTS.
[20:37] <Psi-Jack> Hmm
[20:38] <Psi-Jack> Has any progress been made on an apache upstart job script?