On Fri, 2008-05-30 at 14:24 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > On Fri, 2008-05-30 at 13:59 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > Dan Williams (dcbw@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > > > 'After netfs' should be good enough. Although netfs stop should possibly > > > > do lazy umounts. > > > > > > Ok, just need to bump NM a few bits later it looks like; might as well > > > be K84 to be right after messagebus. > > > > Well, NM will exit anyway when the messagebus exits, will it not? > > No, because the Debian guys got all cranky and want NM to handle dbus > dropouts, because if they need to restart dbus because of a security > issue they don't want that to take down the entire machine including > networking. So there's code to poll the bus every so often and try to > reconnect if NM gets disconnected (either due to an NM error like > sending a non-UTF8 string over the bus or if dbus quits/dies). I am very glad the debian guys got "all cranky" on this issue, Temrinating network connections just because a component need to resytart is plain silly. Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
