When you say 'Check the "state" instead ' Did you mean ActiveState ? On Jul 3, 2015 3:39 PM, "Lennart Poettering" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 03.07.15 15:29, Pradeepa Kumar ([email protected]) wrote: > > > I am writing lib which will monitor apps and notify/callback higher level > > if apps went down. > > How can I achieve this? > > I tried doing this using propertieschanged signal and reading > > substate > > We reserve the liberty to introduce new substates, and hence you > shouldn't check "Substate" anyway if you want to stay compatible with > future versions of systemd. Check the "State" instead, which is more > abstract and is considered API. > > > property and that msg does not have old value and new value in the msg. > > I noticed that when app go down i get two signals and hence two > substates - > > stop and stop-term. > > So it is difficult to call registered callbacks only when substate > changes > > from running->stop. > > > Do i need to maintain current state of app in my lib? > > If you want to track these state changes, you'd have to cache the > states client-side. > > > is there any other easier way for this ?? > > I fear not, sorry. > > Lennart > > -- > Lennart Poettering, Red Hat >
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
