So let me try to sum up where we are now: - it is considered useful to have a full daemon restart be done via HUP - we can not sufficiently simply detect whether the configuration has changed or not - there are situations where it is useful to have the ability to just close files, clear caches etc - people do not like existing things be used in new ways (least surprise principle)
So I conclude: - SIGHUP, as ugly as it is, must stay with existing semantics - a new signal can be defined to just do file closure etc Unfortunately, this means that most systems will still use the terribly expensive during e.g. logrotation. However, this is considered acceptable because a) it always was this way, b) a higher demand environment then has options to avoid that. Over time, package maintainers my get maintainers of logrotate involved to change the HUP to the new signal. Am I grasping this right? Rainer On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 18:37 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > 2008/10/6 Rainer Gerhards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Args... thanks Michael, this makes life a little less easy ;) So we do > > not longer have a clear indication. > > > > Would it make sense to require that the main config file is touched when > > something in the includes is changed? This could be documented. And a > > restart of course pulls everything. > > I don't think that would be such a good idea. > > It is not very intuitive and people are not used to such a behaviour. > They (at least I do) expect "reload" to reload the complete configuration. > > > Michael > _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
