On 2020-05-27 3:18 p.m., Anand Buddhdev via nsd-users wrote: > On 27/05/2020 19:02, Simon Deziel wrote: >>>> As for the failed unlinking of the pidfile, this is harmless and should >>>> not be logged as a warning. It may already be fixed in newer >>>> releases as >>>> it was done with Unbound already. >>> >>> PID files are so passé! They are irrelevant on systems where daemons are >>> run under supervisors. I would highly recommend setting "pidfile" to "" >>> in nsd.conf. This prevents creation of a PID file. Systemd already knows >>> the PID of the NSD process, and can signal it directly. >> >> Would it make sense to simply ignore the pidfile directive when running >> through systemd? > > No. I don't like it when software silently does things. Instead, when > package maintainers build NSD for systems with systemd, they should pass > the --with-pidfile="" option to the configure script, so that by > default, NSD doesn't create PID files.
I like the idea. Since Debian wants to preserve compatibility with both systemd and init, I proposed a slightly different fix to Debian for nsd [1] and unbound [2]. Thanks! Regards, Simon 1: https://salsa.debian.org/dns-team/nsd/-/merge_requests/4 2: https://salsa.debian.org/dns-team/unbound/-/merge_requests/9 _______________________________________________ nsd-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nlnetlabs.nl/mailman/listinfo/nsd-users
