On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Moravec, Stanislav (ERT)
wrote:
> FYI:
> I tried to simply bypass the pending job check:
> +int ignore_stop_pending = true;
> static void socket_enter_running(Socket *s, int cfd) {
> ...
> -if (unit_stop_pending(UNIT(s))) {
> +if (!ignore_stop_pendi
FYI:
I tried to simply bypass the pending job check:
+int ignore_stop_pending = true;
static void socket_enter_running(Socket *s, int cfd) {
...
-if (unit_stop_pending(UNIT(s))) {
+if (!ignore_stop_pending && unit_stop_pending(UNIT(s))) {
But, as expected, it's not as that easy - t
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> This is indeed a shortcoming in systemd's model right now: we don't
> permit a start and a stop job to be enqueued for the same unit at the
> same time. But to do what you want to do we'd need to permit that: the
> service is supposed t
Uoti,
yes, it was about Redhat/Centos7 authd (rfc 1413) service, so it was
the latter - one child process per each connection:
auth@.service:[Unit]
auth@.service:Description=Authd Ident Protocol Requests Server
auth@.service:After=local-fs.target
auth@.service:
auth@.service:[Service]
auth@.ser
On Tue, 2017-05-30 at 18:07 +, Moravec, Stanislav (ERT) wrote:
> OK. Understood, thanks much!
> We'll try to follow up on using some parent process (xinetd or something like
> that).
BTW your problem description wasn't very clear. Is your specific
problem case about socket activation of norma
Stan
-Original Message-
From: Lennart Poettering [mailto:lenn...@poettering.net]
Sent: Monday, 29 May, 2017 17:45
To: Moravec, Stanislav (ERT)
Cc: systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] socket unit refusing connection when JOB_STOP is
pending
On Tue, 16.05.17
On Tue, 16.05.17 11:28, Moravec, Stanislav (ERT) (stanislav.mora...@hpe.com)
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I wanted to seek your opinion about correctness of the current behavior
> of socket activated units.
>
> Let's assume we have socket activated service (for example authd -
> auth.socket) and
>
refusing connection when JOB_STOP is
pending
Hello all,
I wanted to seek your opinion about correctness of the current behavior
of socket activated units.
Let's assume we have socket activated service (for example authd - auth.socket)
and
some other background service (for the purpose of this
Hello all,
I wanted to seek your opinion about correctness of the current behavior
of socket activated units.
Let's assume we have socket activated service (for example authd - auth.socket)
and
some other background service (for the purpose of this test called
authtest.service)
that needs to
