Comment 33 for bug 326768

Revision history for this message
Mario Limonciello (superm1) wrote :

> Agreed. It seems that the latter has been identified and a workaround is
> described in this bug. I think the former should also be well understood
> before pushing anything to a *stable* release. A known broken behaviour
> with a workaround is better then pushing an update that breaks existing
> production systems.
I'm sorry, but I entirely disagree here.

Regardless of what is sending a SIGHUP to mysqld_safe, it should be a supported scenario to allow such signals to be sent to system daemons. It's common for SIGHUP to be used to ask to reload configuration files when the daemon supports it.

The "broken" patch from debian's sole purpose is adding support for catching SIGHUP and a few other signals. It doesn't work properly.

Ignoring the fact that mysqld is getting restarted rather than reloaded, the SIGHUP trap support to issue a refresh would *only* work if you configured /root/my.cnf or had no root mysql password defined in the first place.

How can reverting a portion of it break an existing production system in any way?