On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 08:44 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Wed, 20.06.12 10:17, Mathieu Bridon (boche...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 19:15 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > On Tue, 19.06.12 18:50, Michael Olbrich (m.olbr...@pengutronix.de) wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:03:23AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 18.06.12 21:56, Paul Menzel > > > > > (paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net) wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you know of a service file for openssh-server? > > > > > > > > > > The Fedora packages have some, but I don't like them too much since > > > > > they > > > > > don't use socket activation... > > > > > > > > Is someone actually working on real socket activation for openssh? While > > > > the inetd like stuff works, it does not perform well. > > > > > > it doesn't? In which way? It should be totally OK? > > > > When we worked on porting the package to systemd units, we found that > > the per-connection openssh process would exit with a non-zero status > > code even if the client disconnected properly: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697698#c59 > > > > No idea if that has been fixed upstream since, but that's why the > > inetd-style socket activation units aren't shipped in Fedora. > > Well, but that's hardly a performance issue, and adding "-" to the > ExecStart= line makes this problem go away nicely.
That's what I had proposed at first, but the maintainer didn't want it as that would also ignore actual errors. I'm pretty sure that's the only thing blocking the addition of a openssh-server-ondemand subpackage in Fedora though (the maintainer doesn't want this to be the default if I recall correctly from the bz ticket). -- Mathieu _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
