1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
|
Return-Path: <obnam-dev-bounces@obnam.org>
X-Original-To: distix@pieni.net
Delivered-To: distix@pieni.net
Received: from bagpuss.pepperfish.net (bagpuss.pepperfish.net [148.251.8.16])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pieni.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C3952B858
for <distix@pieni.net>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 05:55:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from platypus.pepperfish.net (unknown [10.112.100.20])
by bagpuss.pepperfish.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B896FCB;
Thu, 29 Oct 2015 04:55:45 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ip6-localhost ([::1] helo=platypus.pepperfish.net)
by platypus.pepperfish.net with esmtp (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian))
id 1ZrfFZ-0004QL-GK; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 04:55:45 +0000
Received: from inmail0 ([10.112.100.10] helo=mx0.pepperfish.net)
by platypus.pepperfish.net with esmtp (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian))
id 1ZrfFX-0004QE-OH
for <obnam-dev@obnam.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 04:55:43 +0000
Received: from mail-yk0-f180.google.com ([209.85.160.180])
by mx0.pepperfish.net with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:128)
(Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <mathstuf@gmail.com>) id 1ZrfFV-0002pY-OB
for obnam-dev@obnam.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 04:55:43 +0000
Received: by ykba4 with SMTP id a4so31165132ykb.3
for <obnam-dev@obnam.org>; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version
:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
bh=vbVOic7JnyuHqc1RLTJvJ0ePn80GEtHZ1zdbO/y58zY=;
b=HDFqZdtgHKu9HkrMrJ/UNiDrCWYAlZUYyE66Ybe2wkdaONo/XQJduN/uU6nB8G6O4/
TgoGEXEh9CjwVGKB4UJyLPz9JXORtQHLpDb+NEukG7M+qDOsY8dnvuYDgDhvxs0rZJKO
CAUlddWER1g67NkFJ4FiTe+V2A18HIdSfcRUTxjUGZbTCgNz1mT+dCMKFaz54WH5/uWM
m73OUPYSXIMwci4tMyISRcXhAnNVkHPqR9i8bnnVwAm+CsNDhGQW62hgFwXiHqCMeCUD
Yn/5OMYmssvxr5S7YvTZjoS9TSsyPrNl7RXt5jlQqUqvL3kZkqZkT7V/BG7gnJalMzes
es8w==
X-Received: by 10.129.89.2 with SMTP id n2mr22553610ywb.119.1446094529892;
Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (10.sub-70-209-141.myvzw.com. [70.209.141.10])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x185sm33290583ywf.13.2015.10.28.21.55.28
for <obnam-dev@obnam.org>
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:55:26 -0400
From: Ben Boeckel <mathstuf@gmail.com>
To: obnam-dev@obnam.org
Message-ID: <20151029045526.GA13909@bronto-burt.dev.benboeckel.net>
References: <20150918050247.GA8128@bronto-burt.dev.benboeckel.net>
<1446094196-14166-1-git-send-email-mathstuf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1446094196-14166-1-git-send-email-mathstuf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
X-Spam-Score: -2.0
X-Spam-Score-int: -19
X-Spam-Bar: --
X-Scanned-By: pepperfish.net, Thu, 29 Oct 2015 04:55:43 +0000
X-Spam-Report: Content analysis details: (-2.0 points)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-1.0 PPF_USER_AGENT_MUTT User-Agent: contains Mutt (Mutt isn't a spam
tool) -0.5 PPF_USER_AGENT User-Agent: exists
1.0 PPF_FROM_CONTAINS_MAIL The From header contains 'mail'
1.2 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mathstuf[at]gmail.com)
-0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low
trust [209.85.160.180 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-ACL-Warn: message may be spam
X-Scan-Signature: 414f5f03ee092b3fac588a5aec0a9d93
Subject: Re: [PATCH] backup: take an inhibitor lock if possible
X-BeenThere: obnam-dev@obnam.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mathstuf@gmail.com
List-Id: Obnam development discussions <obnam-dev-obnam.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://listmaster.pepperfish.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/obnam-dev-obnam.org>,
<mailto:obnam-dev-request@obnam.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://listmaster.pepperfish.net/pipermail/obnam-dev-obnam.org>
List-Post: <mailto:obnam-dev@obnam.org>
List-Help: <mailto:obnam-dev-request@obnam.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://listmaster.pepperfish.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/obnam-dev-obnam.org>,
<mailto:obnam-dev-request@obnam.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: obnam-dev-bounces@obnam.org
Errors-To: obnam-dev-bounces@obnam.org
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 00:49:56 -0400, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> When a backup is happening, the machine should not suspend or otherwise
> go down. Add a setting for taking a systemd inhibitor lock.
>
> The code fails safely which allows both the dbus module and the
> systemd-logind DBus interface to be optional. In both cases, warnings
> are generated.
So, I'm not really sure how to test this properly within the test suite;
the lock is really kind of opaque without running systemd-inhibit to
list the active locks. Manual testing shows that obnam is taking the
inhibitor lock (with the proper description and all) as seen with
`systemd-inhibit --list`. Can anyone without systemd and/or dbus verify
the "fails gracefully" bit? I don't have any testing machines with obnam
and without those bits.
Thanks,
--Ben
_______________________________________________
obnam-dev mailing list
obnam-dev@obnam.org
http://listmaster.pepperfish.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/obnam-dev-obnam.org
|
