[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: busybox
Subject: Re: terminating services started from inetd
From: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux () googlemail ! com>
Date: 2009-02-26 16:23:32
Message-ID: 200902261723.32943.vda.linux () googlemail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
On Thursday 26 February 2009 04:32:26 pm Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >
> > terminating inetd does not terminate any services already started by
> > inetd. I guess this is by design?
> > What is the preferred way to terminate such services?
> >
> > Jocke
>
> So I noticed this in xinetd's man page:
> SIGTERM terminates all running servers before terminating
> xinetd.
>
> This implies that inetd should terminate all services when receiving a
> TERM.
>
> bb, v1.12.2, inetd doesn't do that so I think that a bug in bb
google "man inetd SIGTERM"
The only resulting page which says that this should happen is this one:
http://h30097.www3.hp.com/docs/base_doc/DOCUMENTATION/V51B_HTML/MAN/MAN8/0510____.HTM
Doesn't look like a usual Linux manpage/system to me.
Basically, this page says that "inetd -t" is equivalent to
"killall -TERM inetd" and that SIGTERM should make inetd kill
its children.
Does this match inetd's behavior on modern Linux distros?
This splits into two questions-
1. Do they have "inetd -t"
2. Does initd kills children on SIGTERM
(please provide strace log of such event)
--
vda
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic