Hi, Am 29.07.2012 00:20, schrieb Mantas Mikulėnas:

tty0? How exactly do you switch to it?

Ctrl+Alt+F1.

One cannot have a console on /dev/tty0, sine it's not a real tty but only a pointer to the currently activated console.

Ok, maybe the terminology I've used is wrong. However I'm talking about the console, which normally would come up when pressing "Ctrl+Alt+F1". Guess it would be tty1 then ;). Best regards, Karol Babioch

Hi, Am 29.07.2012 00:56, schrieb Mantas Mikulėnas:

Try enabling getty@tty1.service:

Unfortunately this didn't work. It was enabled already anyway. By the way: systemctl shows that it is enabled, but it is also dead for whatever reason :(. [root@vpcs ~]# systemctl status getty@tty1.service getty@tty1.service - Getty on tty1 Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/getty@.service; enabled) Active: inactive (dead) Docs: man:agetty(8) CGroup: name=systemd:/system/getty@.service/tty1 What would be the best way to figure out what is going on here? Can't find anything suspicious in the logs :(. Best regards, Karol Babioch

On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 8:59 AM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:

On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Karol Babioch wrote:

...

Hi,

Am 29.07.2012 00:56, schrieb Mantas Mikulėnas:

...

Try enabling getty@tty1.service:

Unfortunately this didn't work. It was enabled already anyway.

the link isn't broken, right? pointing to, say, /lib/systemd/...

Good point, but I think systemd only cares about the target's basename anyway? I remember having several such broken links during early usrmove.

most of my getty@tty1.service are an empty file which is then `chattr +i` ...

I prefer `systemctl mask` and pacman's NoExtract, but I suppose that's the same thing. -- Mantas Mikulėnas

On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 12:31 PM, C Anthony Risinger wrote:

On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote:

...

I prefer `systemctl mask` and pacman's NoExtract, but I suppose that's the same thing.

hrm, i thought it was doing it in post_install but i dunno ... for a long time it was installing directly to /etc/systemd/[...] but i'm not sure it's even doing that anymore.

It seems that the post_install uses `systemctl enable`. So NoExtract wouldn't work, but `systemctl mask` should be sufficient, I think? -- Mantas Mikulėnas

On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Karol Babioch wrote:

Hi,

Am 29.07.2012 07:59, schrieb C Anthony Risinger:

...

the link isn't broken, right? pointing to, say, /lib/systemd/...

No, its not:

[root@vpcs ~]# ls -l /etc/systemd/system/getty.target.wants/getty@tty1.service lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 31 Jul 29 01:12 /etc/systemd/system/getty.target.wants/getty@tty1.service -> /usr/lib/systemd/getty@.service

do you have `ls --color` enabled? that link is almost certainly broken: # ls /usr/lib/systemd/getty@.service ls: cannot access /usr/lib/systemd/getty@.service: No such file or # ls /usr/lib/systemd/system/getty@.service /usr/lib/systemd/system/getty@.service ... note the extra `system` in the path. do a: # systemctl reenable getty@tty1.service ... it looks like you probably tried to manually relink it at some point.

By the way: When starting it manually my X server gets killed and I get switched back to tty1. So the unit file should be fine.

that is really odd ... AFAIK they should not conflict with each other at all ... i've no idea whats happening there. the only real difference i see between your setup and min is the use of: display-manager.service -> /usr/lib/systemd/system/gdm.service ... whereas i simply put gdm in graphical.target.wants: graphical.target.wants/gdm.service -> /usr/lib/systemd/system/gdm.service ... i don't think that's really an issue tho. systemd.special seems to suggest that this special unit is mainly for LSB compatibility, but it's not clear. -- C Anthony

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Karol Babioch wrote:

Hi,

Am 29.07.2012 21:00, schrieb C Anthony Risinger:

...

... note the extra `system` in the path. do a: [...] ... it looks like you probably tried to manually relink it at some point

Yeah, I have fiddled around with it after it stopped working.

However it looks now like this:

[johnpatcher@vpcs ~]$ ls -l /etc/systemd/system/getty.target.wants/getty@tty1.service lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 38 30. Jul 15:16 /etc/systemd/system/getty.target.wants/getty@tty1.service -> /usr/lib/systemd/system/getty@.service

Still not working :(.

...

# systemctl reenable getty@tty1.service

[root@vpcs ~]# systemctl reenable getty@tty1.service Failed to issue method call: No such file or directory

So not sure what to do next :(.

Best regards, Karol Babioch

Does any of your services (such as gdm.service) have a Conflicts=getty@tty1.service ? -t

On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 15:22 +0200, Tom Gundersen wrote:

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Karol Babioch wrote:

...

Hi,

Am 29.07.2012 21:00, schrieb C Anthony Risinger:

...

... note the extra `system` in the path. do a: [...] ... it looks like you probably tried to manually relink it at some point

Yeah, I have fiddled around with it after it stopped working.

However it looks now like this:

[johnpatcher@vpcs ~]$ ls -l /etc/systemd/system/getty.target.wants/getty@tty1.service lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 38 30. Jul 15:16 /etc/systemd/system/getty.target.wants/getty@tty1.service -> /usr/lib/systemd/system/getty@.service

Still not working :(.

...

# systemctl reenable getty@tty1.service

[root@vpcs ~]# systemctl reenable getty@tty1.service Failed to issue method call: No such file or directory

So not sure what to do next :(.

Best regards, Karol Babioch

Does any of your services (such as gdm.service) have a Conflicts=getty@tty1.service ?

-t

Thank you very much! Today I noticed this problem and it indeed came from the conflict listed in the gdm.service. Regards, Zhengyu Xu

...

One cannot have a console on /dev/tty0, sine it's not a real tty but only a pointer to the currently activated console.

Ok, maybe the terminology I've used is wrong. However I'm talking about the console, which normally would come up when pressing "Ctrl+Alt+F1". Guess it would be tty1 then ;).

Looks like so on linux but you can certainly be excused for picking it up from somewhere. On OpenBSD you have a /dev/console (I guess like tty0 on linux) and tty0 comes up from ctrl-alt-f1. You also have OpenBSD 5.0 releases Linux kernels start with 3.2.1 not 3.2.0 The Human vs computer friendly argument, I guess. p.s. I noticed this the other day but figured I had said and repeated enough about systemd but as ttys have come up I will mention it. "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Init" "Aside from runlevels 0, 1, and 6, every Unix and Unix-like system treats runlevels a little differently. The common denominator is the /etc/inittab file, which defines what each runlevel does (if they do anything at all)." So it seems systemd has achieved the opposite (maybe for a good reason, I do not know) on one of it's goals and I would say the main driving force behind it of unifying init system control in this case at the very least. -- _______________________________________________________________________ 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface' (Doug McIlroy) _______________________________________________________________________