Bug#168189: libc6: Consider restarting 'samba' on upgrade
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 11:41:09AM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> Did existing connections stop working, or just new connections?
Don't know, I have a 10 minute timeout (deadtime = 10) on the server
in question, so the chances are there were no live connections.
> If just new connections, does restarting samba drop those
> connections?
I believe so. Then again, I would imagine restarting inetd will also
drop the connections, if samba is hanging off inetd (there is a
configuration option for inetd/daemon mode).
You can detect connections with smbstatus, but this will require
messing about with grep and seems beyond the call of thingummy for
libc6.
I have to admit that I'm not familiar with details of samba restarts.
I tend to be quite trigger-happy with killing off running samba
processes and haven't had any problems. Perhaps it would be best to
ask the maintainer.
> What might be worthshile is having another detection section that
> has something like:
>
> The following services are *known* to be broken after this upgrade:
> xdm, samba. (autodetected based on install). You must stop them
> and start them yourself. If I were to do it, it could cause data
> loss.
This would suit me, if it had a [press enter to continue] so I don't
miss it.
> > <pie location="sky">Shouldn't individual packages have their own flag
> > for whether they need restarting on libc upgrades?</pie>
>
> Most glibc upgrades don't cause this grief, only major changes in NSS. I
> don't think asking packages to have a flag for an upgrade every 2 or 3
> years makes sense.
That's fairy nuff. However if there was a convenient mechanism to do
it, some maintainers might use it? I can't suggest anything.
Matthew #8-)
Reply to: