On Thu, 14.08.14 21:38, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidj...@gmail.com) wrote: > > Which is what we do. Except when you specify ExecStop= which basically > > tells systemd that you want to do it instead. So there you go! > > Those daemons I have seen are terminated after receiving signal/command > to do it. Those sysvinit scripts that "synchronously" terminated > services did it by implementing wait for daemon process to exit. What > is worse, the only way to do it is busy looping as they cannot normally > receive notification about process exit.
Well, if they don't have such a protocol, then they can use systemd's default logic for this, and just tweak the parameters. KillMode=, KillSignal=, TimeoutStopSec= are all ways how you can control how exactly systemd should terminate your service. > Compare this with "send daemon command - signal or whatever - and wait > until it exits". This needs to be implemented just once in PID 1 - and > PID 1 already does exactly this most of the time anyway. Why is this > the wrong thing to do? You never explained this when you rejected my > patch. Hmm, this is what we do. By specifiying ExecStop= you turn that off however can plug in your own logic. If you don't have any better logic, then simply don't plug anything in, that's what we recommend anyway. Again: systemd does what you want it to do by default, anyway. By specifiying ExecStop= you however turn this off, and have to do it on your own! Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
