Tobias et al., It turns out that ExecStopPost already provides the hook that we need to be able to handle all terminations with a common procedure. I had made a false assumption about the meaning of ExecStopPost but a closer reading of the manpage entry and a quick test corrected that.
Sorry to have bothered you all. -R > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Tobias Geerinckx-Rice > [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2014 5:12 PM > To: Spence, Richard (EXT-Other - DE/Ulm) > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] Non-Stop Services in an Embedded > Environment > > On 9 September 2014 14:38, Spence, Richard (EXT-Other - DE/Ulm) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > we have an additional requirement for which we can find no clean > (direct) > > solution in systemd: applications in the system should not stop for > any > > reason – any termination must be handled as a failure. > > So... you want *all* terminations to be listed as "failed" in > systemctl (!0), even when the exit status is "success" (0). > > At that point, you're just overloading the term "failure" to mean > something it was never intended to mean. Therefore, any wrapper doing > this is by definition a "[hack] that systemd is supposed to render > unneccessary": systemd not helping you undermine reliable semantics > natively is a *good* thing :-) > > Assuming you can't patch the service(s) in question to return correct > error codes, just be explicit and use an appropriately named/commented > wrapper to tell systemd (and anyone using the system) that you're > doing something substandard. > > Regards, > > T G-R _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
