Re: Who actually gets the TERM signal in "runsvctrl down"?

[Charlie Brady <charlieb-smarden-supervision@budge.apana.org.au>]

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004, Dean Hall wrote:

> | For "apachectl stop", just do "runsvctrl down apache". For "apachectl
> | graceful", do "runsvctrl 1 apache; raunsvctrl u apache". For "apachectrl
> | restart", do "runsvctrl t apache; raunsvctrl u apache". Etc.
> 
> Why are you doing the additional "u"? As I understand it, sending a "u"
> to the fifo is really necessary if the service is marked as down.

Yes. If the service is down and you do "restart" or "graceful", then to 
preserve the semantics you'll need to up it. The "1" and "t" will be 
effective, and the "u" ignored if the service is already up, the "1" and 
"t" will be NOOPS is the service is down, but "u" will bring it up.

> BTW, I recommend running apache2 with pgrphack so it won't kill other
> things when you kill it.

Is there any reason that runsv shouldn't run each run script as a process
group leader? I've had programs bring down runsv and runsvdir (and
therefore /etc/runit/2). IMO, runsv should protect itself. I can't think
of a downside. Gerrit?

---
Charlie