В Fri, 15 Aug 2014 20:25:57 +0300 Uoti Urpala <uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi> пишет:
> > > > > > What is your "desired state" for reload then? > > > > *operating* with the new configuration loaded. > > The problem with this is that it's common for things updating > configuration to be separate from things using the daemon. If something > changes, the configuration update part wants to guarantee that > subsequent requests, *if any*, use the new configuration, but does not > itself make any such requests; as such, blocking for the service to be > up only causes unnecessary delays and sometimes deadlocks. Ensuring that > the service is up belongs to different code paths that actually make > requests to the daemon. And they do that whether there's been a reload > or not, so they need to handle it regardless of reload behavior anyway. > It's not how I interpret "reload" and how "reload" was traditionally implemented by initscripts. "reload" means - request daemon to do whatever is necessary to start using new configuration. It never implied changing this configuration. This happens outside of scope of performing "reload" action. You seem to interpret "reload" as request to update static on-disk configuration of service. Am I right? _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
