please don't break "reply-to-list" with reply-all Am 31.07.2014 um 13:30 schrieb Mantas Mikulėnas: > On Jul 31, 2014 12:57 PM, "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net > <mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net>> wrote: >> Am 31.07.2014 um 02:16 schrieb Colin Guthrie: >> > Reindl Harald wrote on 30/07/14 13:34: >> >> *how* should that both help in calling "apachectl -t" *before* stop the >> >> service and in case of a error-repsonse keep it running? >> > >> > Note, just for clarity, you don't really want to run such a config test >> > when explicitly stopping a service >> >> i do want that in case it ends in a state where i can't start it afterwards >> "systemctl stop X && rsync data....; systemctl start X" and go to a coffee is >> not that uncommon > > What if the configuration is fine in the beginning, but another admin breaks > it while your rsync is running?
then *really* shit happens - that you can't catch all cases don't mean you should not try to catch the possible ones normally one does a hot rsync while service is up, stop the service followed by a cold rsync and start the service - so the time window is very short even if your dataset is gigabytes large anyways, it makes no sense to discuss about each and every possible case on the world - i only pointed out "you don't really want" is not true, anything else is the responsibility of the admin and depends stronly on the environemnt and usecase we talk about *options* here and the correct usecase is out of scope if you want to find arguments against something you will always find one like "ExecReload=/usr/bin/systemctl poweroff" to show a extreme example or take away CAP_SETUID from httpd leading in running as root
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
