Re: "gconfd-2: no process killed" messages

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 22/09/2007, Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On Saturday 22 September 2007, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>
> > +  g_spawn_command_line_sync ("/usr/bin/killall -q -TERM "
> > GCONF_SERVERDIR "/" GCONFD, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
>
> Hm, ScriptletSnippets advices to use -HUP; is -TERM instead of it intentional?
>
The next time an application uses GConf, the daemon is automatically
respawned anyway, right? So there should be no difference between -HUP
and -TERM.

-- 
Michel

--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux