On 07/08/2011 10:57 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote: > On 07/08/2011 03:57 PM, Steve Dickson wrote: >> On 07/08/2011 08:23 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: >>> So, I'd suggest strongly not to try starting all services from a single >>> file. There's a reason why we explicitly forbid having more than one >>> ExecStart= in a unit file (except for Type=oneshot services). >> Thank you for this explanation. It appears your definition of a >> service might be a bit too simple for many subsystems. You seem >> to think that on service will only start one system daemon, which >> is not the case in the more complex subsystems. > > Each of the daemons can have its own unit file. We don't have to map the > old initscripts to systemd units 1:1. So one service can not have multiple daemons? > >>> Also, you should not spawn forking processes in ExecStartPre=, that's >>> not what it is for. In fact I am pretty sure I will change systemd now >>> to kill off all remaining processes after each ExecStartPre= command now >>> that I am aware that people are misusing it like this. >> If they are not for forking off process, what are the for? > > ExecStartPre= are for set up commands that do not leaved fork processes > behind when they exit. Meaning they are not for daemon processes, which does make sense... > >> It seems quite logical that one would use a number of ExecStartPre= commands >> to do some set up and then use the ExecStart= to start the daemon. > > Well, that's exactly how they're used. Do some preparation in > ExecStartPre and run the daemon in ExecStart. > >>> ExecStartPre= is executed strictly in order, and in the order they >>> appear in the unit file. >> True, but there is no synchronization. Meaning first process can >> end after the second process, which think is a problem. > > This must be some misunderstanding, or you're seeing an unusual bug. > It just cannot happen. The second ExecStartPre of the unit is run after > the first one exits, not earlier. > Or do you mean synchronization among several units? Then you want to > specify ordering dependencies (Before, After). Please take a look at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=699040#c35 It sure looks like one process is being started for another one ends... steved. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
