[Fedora-packaging] "gconfd-2: no process killed" messages
ville.skytta at iki.fi
Mon Sep 24 14:49:15 UTC 2007
On Monday 24 September 2007, Michel Salim wrote:
> On 22/09/2007, Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta at iki.fi> wrote:
> > On Saturday 22 September 2007, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > + g_spawn_command_line_sync ("/usr/bin/killall -q -TERM "
> > > GCONF_SERVERDIR "/" GCONFD, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> > Hm, ScriptletSnippets advices to use -HUP; is -TERM instead of it
> > intentional?
> The next time an application uses GConf, the daemon is automatically
> respawned anyway, right?
I don't know, that's why I asked ;)
> So there should be no difference between -HUP and -TERM.
Actually, if the behaviour you described is how it works, -TERM may be a
better idea than -HUP performance-wise - no need to repeatedly re-read things
eg. during a rpm transaction which installs many packages that have something
to do with GConf.
More information about the Fedora-packaging