Re: "/etc/init.d/NetworkManager quit" ?

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 10:51 +0000, Marc Herbert wrote:
> Dan Williams a écrit :
> > It's complicated.  Previous mechanisms didn't have a daemon running in
> > the background actively managing the network.  So there was nothing to
> > restart.  Unfortunately using Unix signals there's no way to really
> > express "terminate but don't take stuff down".
> 
> Using sigaction() you can give the semantic of your choice to any
> signal.  Correct if I am wrong but a lot of daemons already do that to
> implement things like "/etc/init.d/foo reload".

Yeah, that's also a good point.  HUP and USR1 are already reserved (in
mind at least, not implemented) so maybe USR2 or something.

Dan

> 
> > We could however use a D-Bus call to do so, or something like that and
> > keep -TERM as taking interfaces down.
> 
> Unix signals are infinitely inferior to D-BUS. Yet they look like the
> right tool for this simple job, don't they?
> 
> 
> Implemented one way or the other, this new "quit" feature would be nice.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NetworkManager-list mailing list
> NetworkManager-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list