Luke Kanies wrote: > On Jul 24, 2009, at 3:48 AM, David Schmitt wrote: > >> James Turnbull wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> David Schmitt wrote: >>>> Even if that might mean having some .puppettmp file lying around >>>> from an >>>> aborted filetransfer? >>>> >>> Isn't that implied by certain types of shut-downs? Are you >>> suggesting Puppet do some clean-up when someone Ctrl-C's for example? >> "finishing the evaluation/application of the current resource" would >> imply that. Yes. But that'll be probably type/provider specific. E.g. >> Exec should really cancel the running command? > > IMO, if you want a process to exit right now, you use SIGKILL. In the > general case, Puppet should do its best to be safe. > > It sounds a lot like HUP should finish transactions but TERM and INT > should only finish the current resource. Any complaints about that > behaviour? >
HUP is normally reserved for reloading configurations, not terminating a process. While an SA shouldn't blindly send signals to processes, I think having HUP actually terminate a process certainly violates the principle of Least Surprise. Steven Jenkins End Point Corporation --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
