On Tue, 11.01.11 09:39, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri (barbi...@profusion.mobi) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Alexander E. Patrakov > <patra...@gmail.com> wrote: > ... > > ExecReload=/bin/kill -HUP $MAINPID > > This becoming a common case, shouldn't we have a ExecReloadSignal=HUP, > or SignalReload=HUP? Gmrbl. I don't want to bless sending SHIGUP really as a good solution by introducing ExecREloadSignal or something like this. The reason is that it is asynchronous by nature, and there's no way to wait for the reload to happen and finish. The start and stop operations for services are always synchronous and so should the reload operation be. While in many cases the distinction between async and sync reloading doesn't matter much I definitely want to make sure that people think about this and that they do things synchronously if possible and only fall back to async reloading via SIGHUP or suchlike if it doesn't matter in the specific case or there is really no other way. Or in short: I'd much prefer if people would use dbus-send (or some service-specific equivalent) to synchronously fire off a reload method call instead of using an async SIGHUP signal. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
