Leonid Isaev <lisaev@xxxxxxxxxxxx> on Wed, 2014/06/11 12:13:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:15:18PM +0200, Christian Hesse wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 12:15:18 +0200
> > From: Christian Hesse <list@xxxxxxxx>
> > To: arch-general <arch-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Christian Hesse <mail@xxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: [arch-general] [PATCH 1/1] systemd: restart services after update
> > X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.0.0
> >
> > From: Christian Hesse <mail@xxxxxxxx>
> >
> > ---
> > systemd.install | 6 ++++++
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/systemd.install b/systemd.install
> > index 5c370f7..11e97bc 100644
> > --- a/systemd.install
> > +++ b/systemd.install
> > @@ -27,6 +27,12 @@ maybe_reexec() {
> >
> > if sd_booted; then
> > systemctl --system daemon-reexec
> > +
> > + for SERVICE in systemd-journald systemd-logind systemd-machined
> > systemd-networkd systemd-resolved systemd-udevd; do
> > + if systemctl is-active ${SERVICE} >/dev/null; then
> > + systemctl restart ${SERVICE}
> > + fi
> > + done
> > fi
> > }
>
> Are you sure it's a good idea to restart things like that? Because this
> assumes that these daemons are independent -- is this a valid assumption?
> It seems that systemctl daemon-reexec _should_ reexec itself and its flock
> of helpers...
I do not know if it is a good idea...
At least restarting systemd-udevd manually did not have a bad impact.
--
main(a){char*c=/* Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH"
"CX:;",b;for(a/* Chris get my mail address: */=0;b=c[a++];)
putchar(b-1/(/* gcc -o sig sig.c && ./sig */b/42*2-3)*42);}
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
