lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> Zitat von Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org>:
>
> > Wietse Venema:
> >> lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> >> > Zitat von Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org>:
> >> >
> >> > > lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> >> > >> The "problem" is more of that distribution like Ubuntu and Redhat are
> >> > >> moving to "upstart" for boot and starting services/daemons. The main
> >> > >> difference for the started services is that upstart need the program
> >
> > Is there any reason they can't do this:
> >
> > Postfix "job" script:
> >
> > pre-start exec postfix start
> > post-stop exec postfix stop
> >
> > With this, the system will do the work for them, and everything
> > uses stable documented interfaces.
>
>
> I'm just on the way learning the new concepts of upstart...
> As far as i understand the common way is to not detach as it is done
> in the common way but run in foreground to keep contact with upstart
> (init) so status can be easily collected. It should be possible to
I'll repeat, this does not work with Postfix multi-instance support,
which requires multiple master daemons.
They can use this:
pre-start exec postfix start
pre-stop exec postfix stop
Or they can use a "postfix upstart" pacifier which does "postfix
start" then does nothing until shutdown:
exec postfix upstart
pre-stop exec postfix stop
They should not start and stop the master directly. Among other
things, that does not work with multi-instance support.
Wietse
