[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: pipewire config



Hello Paul,

Thanks for that. You may have exposed a whole in my knowledge of systemd. I was believing that I could just comment out the ConditionUser directive and have the same effect in the override files.

Also, I was trying to start the services without the --user directive because I had thought that maybe doing so would make them specific to the root user, when I am trying to get this running system wide?

Where, if possible can one see what systemd thinks it's configuration is?

Thanks again for the help. I'll keep banging on it.

--FC


> On Mar 2, 2023, at 18:47, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2023-03-02 at 09:44 -0500, Frank Carmickle wrote:
> 
>> Does anyone have pipewire running as a system service
> 
> Pipewire in Debian only has a per-user service:
> 
>    $ dpkg -L pipewire{,-pulse} | grep 'systemd.*\.'
>    /usr/lib/systemd/user/pipewire.service
>    /usr/lib/systemd/user/pipewire.socket
>    /usr/lib/systemd/user/pipewire-pulse.service
>    /usr/lib/systemd/user/pipewire-pulse.socket
> 
> That service has the root user disabled:
> 
>    $ dpkg -L pipewire{,-pulse} | grep 'systemd.*\.' | xargs -d '\n' grep -ih root
>    ConditionUser=!root
>    ConditionUser=!root
>    ConditionUser=!root
>    ConditionUser=!root
> 
> To override that, run this when logged in as root:
> 
>    systemctl --user edit pipewire{,-pulse}.{service,socket}
> 
> Then save this to each of the override files:
> 
>    [Unit]
>    ConditionUser=
> 
> Then reload the systemd config and start the root user services:
> 
>    systemctl --user daemon-reload
>    systemctl --user start pipewire{,-pulse}.{service,socket}
> 
> Then check that the services are running:
> 
>   systemctl --user is-active pipewire{,-pulse}.{service,socket}
> 
> Then if they aren't you can check for more details:
> 
>   systemctl --user status pipewire{,-pulse}.{service,socket}
> 
> -- 
> bye,
> pabs
> 
> https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


Reply to: