[00:11] ahammond: indeed.. tweaks here and there just make them simpler [00:12] expect exit should also eliminate some unsightly post-start's [02:25] i'm using ubuntu 10.04 lts, but i want to use upstart 1.4, is this possible? [03:21] bradleyayers: in theory it would work fine [03:22] i'm cherry picking the dependencies from 11.10 [03:22] bradleyayers: the package might not work without some mods, but the upstream bits would probably be fine. [03:22] Plesk is installed on the server, so i'm concerned it might break that, since it does all sorts of stupid shit [03:23] hah yeah .. plesk + anything different == immolation of your entire business [03:23] it's horrible D: [03:25] uhh how do i get dpkg to install two things that depend on each other: http://dpaste.com/690059/ :( [03:27] oops, i should really ask in ubuntu [07:34] can someone please take a look at this question: http://serverfault.com/questions/337198/upstart-output-pre-start-script-content/351124 ? Is there a better way to do it? === JanC_ is now known as JanC === sadmac is now known as sadmac_food === sadmac_food is now known as sadmac [17:32] jodh: Hey, I'm working on an upstart cookbook fix and I noticed this language ... [17:32] The advantage of using `start-stop-daemon(8)`_ is that is simply changes the [17:32] user and group the command is run as. However, there is a problem with [17:32] using ``start-stop-daemon`` in that Upstart cannot track the PID for jobs [17:32] which use it [17:32] I don't see why that would be the case [17:33] running that way drops user privs, then execs the requested command.. so upstart should be able to handle it just fine [20:43] Hello. I'm trying to build upstart for an LFS environment and having some issues with failing the tests. [20:54] tmike: pastebin your failure maybe? [20:54] http://pastebin.com/rZmbnhDa [20:54] Sorry got distracted setting up pastebincl on the vm [20:56] test_job_process sees the wrong output for the /this/command/does/not/exist bits [20:56] that's the first error [20:58] That 'wrong content' part, with the test_job_process is not the first error of that variety. I went and changed the test to look for "No such file or directory" and then started to wonder if there's a reason it wants 1: /this/blah: not found instead of the "No such" [20:59] Actually, if I don't run the tests as superuser, those are the only errors I get. [21:09] Should I just ignore the failures, or is there a reason to expect the "not found" errors vs the "No such" errors [21:09] ?