HUP handling: a thought

Peter Nixon listuser at
Wed May 2 20:47:49 CEST 2007

On Wed 02 May 2007, Alan DeKok wrote:
> Peter Nixon wrote:
> > The system should do _something_ when it receives -HUP (other than
> > crash). It this turns out to be a full restart, then so be it...
>   So there's a requirement to handle HUP.  I don't see why.

Hmm.. Well, I guess you could just ignore the signal, but doing a restart on 
HUP would seems pretty trivial to do (please correct me if I'm wrong), and 
would keep things unsurprising to newcomers..

>   How about a requirement to dynamically update the running
> configuration?  That could be done via re-exec on HUP, or by the crazy
> SQL scheme I talked about.

Hmm. I just got around to reading the web page...

"The database interface uses a subset of the Postgres protocol and is 
compatible with the Postgres bindings.. "


>   I don't understand the fixation on HUP.  I don't like SQL, but if I
> can use an SQL client to edit *every* configuration parameter in a
> running server, I don't see why HUP would *ever* be necessary.
>   Recent versions of OpenLDAP support an "dn=config", or something like
> that.  It means any configuration parameter can be dynamically changed,
> meaning you *never* have to HUP the server.

Sure. Not necessary. But there are old scripts floating around that do HUP, 
and unix people do tend to expect -HUP to do something... Personally I dont 
care that much... I just do "rcfreeradius restart" ;-)


Peter Nixon
PGP Key:

More information about the Freeradius-Devel mailing list