Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:24:04 +0100 From: Michael Grimm <trashcan@ellael.org> To: FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Cc: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> Subject: Re: 'pkg upgrade -f spamassassin' stops but doesn't restart spamd Message-ID: <C992D285-E5F3-49CA-902A-C2DDE9D3EEF9@ellael.org> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1vExnreT2mJ1cEKALZGwV4emS4fanSiEB_v4e5-BPU0tA@mail.gmail.com> References: <76627A89-D7E9-4010-910B-5F25886E7E7E@ellael.org> <5A523873.2050001@quip.cz> <CAN6yY1vExnreT2mJ1cEKALZGwV4emS4fanSiEB_v4e5-BPU0tA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 7:10 AM, Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> = wrote: >> There are no consensus about what services should do on deinstall or >> upgrade. That's why there is such a mess in ports / packages. >> Some did nothing (my preferred way), some stop (but did not start) = the >> service, [=E2=80=A6] > Beg pardon, but I am aware of this being discussed twice on this list = and > both times there was a clear consensus in both cases that it was > unacceptable or a port/package upgrade to touch running daemons. = There > were arguments that some port might make changes in underlying files = that > could break a daemon in some way, though I can't recall any actual = examples. >=20 > The only real argument was that leaving a daemon with a serious > vulnerability running was not acceptable. A competent admin should = never > let this happen, but I'm sure it has. FTR: I have filed PR 225030 on this. Thanks and regards, Michael
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C992D285-E5F3-49CA-902A-C2DDE9D3EEF9>