On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:29 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Tue, 23.02.16 14:58, Ben Woodard (wood...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Lennart Poettering <
> lenn...@poettering.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 17.02.16 17:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 17.02.16 17:44, Ben Woodard (wood...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > Is it intentional that systemd holds a reference to a socket it has
> > just accepted even though it just handed the open socket over to a
&g
> On Feb 18, 2016, at 4:23 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 09:59:32AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:44 AM, Ben Woodard wrote:
>>> Is it intentional that systemd holds a reference to a socket it
Is it intentional that systemd holds a reference to a socket it has just
accepted even though it just handed the open socket over to a socket.activated
service that it has just started.
For example given the following unit files:
/etc/systemd/system/test.socket:
[Unit]
Description=test service
