On Wed, 08.08.12 21:14, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > On 08/08/2012 05:30 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > >On Tue, 07.08.12 16:01, David Strauss (da...@davidstrauss.net) wrote: > > > >>On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:46 AM, Lennart Poettering > >><lenn...@poettering.net> wrote: > >>>(But please, don't implement this bit just yet, let's wait for somebody > >>>actually needing this. Note though, that Upstart actually does have > >>>functionality like this). > >>There are broken daemons like the "cluster" support in node.js that > >>return non-zero on clean shutdowns. While this is broken behavior, it > >>seems the systemd standard is to support broken/non-standard behavior > >>with optional settings. (That is, the default in systemd is a > >>well-behaved application.) > >Hmm, I was kinda waiting for use cases like this. i.e. before we add an > >option to reconfigure what clean exits are I wanted an explicit request > >for it, so that we don't end up adding something that is actually > >unncessary. > > > >Added this to the TODO list now. > > Should not this be fixed in the daemon instead of worked around in systemd? Yes, it should. Generally that's the rule we try to follow, but I think in this case it is OK to make an exception, simply because it's half a valid usecase to return other things than just errors with the exit code, even though I think it's shady... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel