Re: Upstart job for BIND9

2012-12-04 Thread Anand Buddhdev
On 29/11/2012 11:25, Alexander Gurvitz wrote: Hi Alexander, > I'm trying to run a bind9 from an upstart job instead of an init.d script. > I'm a bit confused if I should "expect fork" or "expect daemon". It seems > to work with "expect fork", though somehow I don't feel convinced. Actually, you

Re: Upstart job for BIND9

2012-12-01 Thread Alexander Gurvitz
> I don't think it's wise to respawn named without knowing why it crashed. > This could lead to repeated crashed and system overload. 1. I have a system whose only reason to exist is running bind, once bind stops I don't mind the whole system overload, crash or go to hell. 2. When I've seen that m

Re: Upstart job for BIND9

2012-11-30 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: famous assertion failures? What system do you run the BIND on? Shouldn't you better upgrade to version that has no famous assertion failures? On 29.11.12 20:50, Alexander Gurvitz wrote: Well, of course it's extremely exaggerated,

Re: Upstart job for BIND9

2012-11-29 Thread Noel Butler
On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 13:35 +0100, Carsten Strotmann wrote: > Hello Alexander, > > Alexander Gurvitz writes: > > > Carsten, > > > > The script in my original question (it's in the P.S. at the bottom of > > my first mail) seem to work for me. > > Ahh, thanks, my Emacs was hiding that :) > >

Re: Upstart job for BIND9

2012-11-29 Thread Alexander Gurvitz
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > famous assertion failures? What system do you run the BIND on? Shouldn't > you > better upgrade to version that has no famous assertion failures? Well, of course it's extremely exaggerated, sorry if I offended someone. But crashes

Re: Upstart job for BIND9

2012-11-29 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 29.11.12 14:03, Alexander Gurvitz wrote: It will run bind on runlevels 2345, stop bind on other runlevels, but the most important - respawn it once it stops with one it's famous assertion failures :). famous assertion failures? What system do you run the BIND on? Shouldn't you better upgrade

Re: Upstart job for BIND9

2012-11-29 Thread Carsten Strotmann
Hello Alexander, Alexander Gurvitz writes: > Carsten, > > The script in my original question (it's in the P.S. at the bottom of > my first mail) seem to work for me. Ahh, thanks, my Emacs was hiding that :) > (I can't decide which one is better: bind.conf, bind9.conf or > named.conf :) I w

Re: Upstart job for BIND9

2012-11-29 Thread Alexander Gurvitz
s better: bind.conf, bind9.conf or named.conf :) #UPSTART JOB FOR BIND9 start on runlevel [2345] stop on runlevel [!2345] pre-start script # dirs under /var/run can go away on reboots. mkdir -p /var/run/named chmod 775 /var/run/named chown root:bind /var/run/named >/dev/null 2>&1 || true end

Re: Upstart job for BIND9

2012-11-29 Thread Carsten Strotmann
Hello Alexander, Alexander Gurvitz writes: > Hello. > > I'm trying to run a bind9 from an upstart job instead of an init.d > script. > I'm a bit confused if I should "expect fork" or "expect daemon". It > seems > to work with "expect fork", though somehow I don't feel convinced. > > (Upstart mu

Upstart job for BIND9

2012-11-29 Thread Alexander Gurvitz
Hello. I'm trying to run a bind9 from an upstart job instead of an init.d script. I'm a bit confused if I should "expect fork" or "expect daemon". It seems to work with "expect fork", though somehow I don't feel convinced. (Upstart must know how the daemon forks - if it forks once, "expect fork"