From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [PATCH] Change the implementation of action_on_fail Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 10:29:05 -0400 Message-ID: <20130731142905.GH31151@redhat.com> References: <73cc07330929ba4b226f2a0623a5459cd42932b9.1374574542.git.bhe@redhat.com> <51F91A14.4020601@redhat.com> <20130731142050.GG31151@redhat.com> <51F91E75.3070102@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51F91E75.3070102-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: initramfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Harald Hoyer Cc: Baoquan He , initramfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, WANG Chao On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 04:25:57PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: [..] > >> I like it. > >> > >> Vivek: would that solve one of your systemd problems? > > > > Hi Harald, > > > > Yes this should solve one of the problems of being able to call emergency > > shell from kdump module. > > > > I was thinking of modirying emergency.service on the fly and then reload > > systemd config. But I guess this solution is simpler. > > > > It also takes away the flexibility of being able to specify "reboot" or > > some other actions as failure actions. But nobody as asked for those > > yet. > > > > So yes, agreed, this will solve atleast one problem. So makes sense > > to take it in. > > > > Thanks > > Vivek > > > > pushed, thanks! Hi Harald, Do you still like the parameter name "rd.action_on_fail". I think a new parameter say, "rd.no_emergecny_shell" might make more sense to reflect what we are doing. If you like it, I can request bao to post a new patch and make appropriate changes. Thanks Vivek