On 06/06/2014 11:56 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Fri, 06.06.14 09:48, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
>On 06/05/2014 05:00 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >I think it would make sense to recommend that packagers and upstream
> >packages adopt Restart=on-failure or Restar
Am 06.06.2014 11:48, schrieb Jóhann B. Guðmundsson:
> On 06/05/2014 05:00 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> I think it would make sense to recommend that packagers and upstream
>> packages adopt Restart=on-failure or Restart=on-abnormal (where the
>> former is not appropriate) for all long-running
On Fri, 06.06.14 09:48, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On 06/05/2014 05:00 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >I think it would make sense to recommend that packagers and upstream
> >packages adopt Restart=on-failure or Restart=on-abnormal (where the
> >former is not appropriate)
On 06/05/2014 05:00 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
I think it would make sense to recommend that packagers and upstream
packages adopt Restart=on-failure or Restart=on-abnormal (where the
former is not appropriate) for all long-running daemons. However, this
recommendation should be taken with a
On Thu, 05.06.14 01:39, Marco d'Itri (m...@linux.it) wrote:
> Should upstream packages and distributions use Restart=on-failure in
> their default configuration unless there are package-specific reasons to
> not do this?
That's a very good question. See this discussion regarding the Fedora
poli
Should upstream packages and distributions use Restart=on-failure in
their default configuration unless there are package-specific reasons to
not do this?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
systemd-devel mailing list
sys
