Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 06:46:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> To: Juha Saarinen <juhasaarinen@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proper way to run bind9 Message-ID: <20040928064540.O5729@ync.qbhto.arg> In-Reply-To: <b34be8420409280513cb764ae@mail.gmail.com> References: <1096042856.24267.6.camel@purgatory.ceribus.net> <xzpsm97v49e.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040924222550.F6548@URF.trarfvf> <20040925001835.U7126@URF.trarfvf><20040927184543.I911@bo.vpnaa.bet> <20040928024928.R5094@ync.qbhto.arg> <b34be8420409280513cb764ae@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Juha Saarinen wrote:
>> That same man page then defines the behavior for SIGINT and SIGTERM.
>> Killing named with a signal in this case is harmless, and should be
>> functionally equivalent to 'rndc stop', except in those cases where rndc
>> is buggered for some reason.
>
> Yebbut... hows does that justify ignoring the vendor supplied
> directions for the software in question? We're supposed to use rndc,
> not signals.
How about this. I promise that if there is ever a day when what is
happening now DOESN'T work, I will fix it. Sound like a deal?
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040928064540.O5729>