On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 02:09:27PM +0100, Féliciano Matias wrote: As expected, that's entirely the responsibility of root. Doing this from a %post script would be wrong, especially a %post script for anything other than the httpd package itself. joe

On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 04:33:13PM +0100, Féliciano Matias wrote: I'd say it depends on the daemon, for some it could be necessary. But for any network-facing daemon I would say that it's surprising and undesirable behaviour if a package update breaks active client connections etc. Making configuration changes take effect from a %post is unfriendly; especially if the config is not marked noreplace. joe

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Féliciano Matias wrote: | Le jeudi 13 janvier 2005 à 10:05 +0000, Joe Orton a écrit : | |>On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 04:33:13PM +0100, Féliciano Matias wrote: |> |>>Is this a bug ? |>>$ rpm -q --scripts bind |>>postuninstall scriptlet (using /bin/sh): |>>if [ "$1" -ge 1 ]; then |>> /etc/rc.d/init.d/named condrestart >/dev/null 2>&1 || : |>>fi |> |>I'd say it depends on the daemon, for some it could be necessary. But |>for any network-facing daemon I would say that it's surprising and |>undesirable behaviour if a package update breaks active client |>connections etc. Making configuration changes take effect from a %post |>is unfriendly; especially if the config is not marked noreplace. |> | | | When I update my system, the propose is to use the new version (security | fix, ...). Perhaps it's better to schedule an update at midnight than | when there is a rush of connection. It's up to the administrator to | decide when and how to update his system. | If daemons are not restarted when I update a system then when this | append ? | Do you ask me to always reboot my computer after "yum update" ? Too bad. | Suppose I update httpd and httpd is not restarted. One week later the | server is restarted (power failure), the new httpd does not start and | "bad luck" I am in holidays... | | What do you think about this scenario ? | | btw, "service httpd reload" (or condreload) is not enough alter an | update ? | I was thinking about this the other day in fact and i had a couple of questions. First off i agree that the daemon should be restarted or at least be offered (see discussion below) to be restarted during the installation of an updated package. I was wondering how the rpm process is exposed to agents that use it (e.g. yum, apt). Do yum and apt simply parse standard output from rpm or is there some sort of sane notification method they are using to drive an event (via rpmlibs or somesuch)? Along this same issue packages like mplayer plugin "require" mozilla's rpm to be installed when in fact firefox works just fine as well. Is there any normal way for the packager to specify that either firefox or mozilla should be installed (but not necessarily both). I recognize that this could cause some issues with dep resolution (e.g. prompting on which to include in dep inclusion if neither is installed) which is why i asked the earlier question that refers to how yum and apt communicate with rpm (or possibly rpmlibs?). If these are total non-issues forgive me and ignore the post but i have run into CLI output a number of times while running various GUI's provided with fedora (rhgb, gyum, synaptic). This makes them seem like simple wrappers simple interpreters (that fail on abnormal behavior or output) to the CLI versions instead of integrated alternative views based on event driven architectures. - -- Michael Favia michael.favia(a)insitesinc.com Insites Incorporated http://michael.insitesinc.com

Féliciano Matias wrote: "service httpd reload" is enough for reloading the configuration files. httpd can do this while already loaded into memory. Observe we are in a thread about a mod_dav_svn update. That is *not* a configuration file. Reloading a module requires "service httpd restart". Joe, what about a system variable somewhere that would flag if the administrator wants an RPM update to restart the relevant service? Default "false", of course. -- Pedro Lamarão

Féliciano Matias wrote: Hm... I stand corrected. -- Pedro Lamarão