[arch-general] systemctl problems with enable, disable, start, stop

[Wilhelm Schuster]

Hmm, this could be caused by a bad interaction between lvm2 and systemd.
Please see the linked issue [0]. It seems to be caused by lvm2>=2.02.153
and systemd 229/230. Downgrading to 2.02.150 could help.

[0]: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/3353

On 05/29/2016 02:07 PM, Maykel Franco via arch-general wrote:
> 2016-05-29 13:50 GMT+02:00 Maykel Franco <maykeldebian at gmail.com>:
>> 2016-05-29 13:46 GMT+02:00 Maykel Franco <maykeldebian at gmail.com>:
>>> 2016-05-29 13:42 GMT+02:00 Maykel Franco <maykeldebian at gmail.com>:
>>>> 2016-05-29 13:19 GMT+02:00 Ralf Mardorf <silver.bullet at zoho.com>:
>>>>> On Sun, 29 May 2016 12:57:54 +0200, Maykel Franco wrote:
>>>>>> I have installed archlinux from zero. And when I enable anything
>>>>>> service the command is slow and i get this error:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is the bug in systemctl?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think so, but perhaps I'm mistaken, OTOH Google doesn't
>>>>> find relevant links [1] ...
>>>>>
>>>>> [rocketmouse at archlinux ~]$ pacman -Qo /usr/bin/systemctl
>>>>> /usr/bin/systemctl is owned by systemd 229-3
>>>>>
>>>>> ... at least 229-3 works here without such an error. I just tested
>>>>> start/stop.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding the speed, it depends on what my network scripts are doing,
>>>>> if I start or stop them.
>>>>>
>>>>> [rocketmouse at archlinux ~]$ sudo systemctl start alice
>>>>> [rocketmouse at archlinux ~]$ sudo systemctl stop alice
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> [rocketmouse at archlinux ~]$ sudo systemctl stop alice-dhcp
>>>>> [rocketmouse at archlinux ~]$ sudo systemctl start alice-dhcp
>>>>>
>>>>> They could finish immediately or take very long, but that is caused by
>>>>> those scripts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Ralf
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> https://www.google.de/?gws_rd=ssl#q=arch+linux+StartServiceByName+for+org.freedesktop.PolicyKit1:+Timeout+was+reached
>>>>
>>>> Server:
>>>>
>>>> [root at arch-kodi-nas maykel]# LANG=C pacman -Qo /usr/bin/systemctl
>>>> /usr/bin/systemctl is owned by systemd 229-3
>>>>
>>>> In my laptop with the version systemd is the same, no problem with
>>>> systemd, dbus or avahi.
>>>>
>>>> In the server, today install archlinux from zero. I don't understand anything...
>>>
>>> -- Unit polkit.service has begun starting up.
>>> may 29 13:45:05 arch-kodi-nas polkitd[24054]: Started polkitd version 0.113
>>> may 29 13:45:05 arch-kodi-nas polkitd[24054]: Loading rules from
>>> directory /etc/polkit-1/rules.d
>>> may 29 13:45:05 arch-kodi-nas polkitd[24054]: Loading rules from
>>> directory /usr/share/polkit-1/rules.d
>>> may 29 13:45:05 arch-kodi-nas polkitd[24054]: Finished loading,
>>> compiling and executing 1 rules
>>> may 29 13:45:05 arch-kodi-nas polkitd[24054]: Lost the name
>>> org.freedesktop.PolicyKit1 - exiting
>>> may 29 13:45:05 arch-kodi-nas systemd[1]: Started Authorization Manager.
>>> -- Subject: Unit polkit.service has finished start-up
>>> -- Defined-By: systemd
>>> -- Support: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
>>> --
>>> -- Unit polkit.service has finished starting up.
>>> --
>>> -- The start-up result is done.
>>> may 29 13:45:30 arch-kodi-nas dbus[292]: [system] Failed to activate
>>> service 'org.freedesktop.PolicyKit1': timed out
>>> may 29 13:45:30 arch-kodi-nas systemd[1]: Stopping Starts instance of
>>> Kodi using xinit...
>>> -- Subject: Unit kodi.service has begun shutting down
>>
>>
>> systemctl restart kodi, for example:
>>
>> ==> /var/log/auth.log <==
>> May 29 15:49:47 arch-kodi-nas dbus[292]: [system] Failed to activate
>> service 'org.freedesktop.PolicyKit1': timed out
>> May 29 15:49:47 arch-kodi-nas polkitd[24167]: Loading rules from
>> directory /etc/polkit-1/rules.d
>> May 29 15:49:47 arch-kodi-nas polkitd[24167]: Loading rules from
>> directory /usr/share/polkit-1/rules.d
>> May 29 15:49:47 arch-kodi-nas polkitd[24167]: Finished loading,
>> compiling and executing 1 rules
>> May 29 15:49:47 arch-kodi-nas polkitd[24167]: Lost the name
>> org.freedesktop.PolicyKit1 - exiting
> 
> I removed a disk 2TB who thought that was faulty because it gave me
> problems once and it works well. I don't understand anything...
>