SAMBA digest 1822
steve at ducksfeet.com
Fri Sep 25 18:20:03 GMT 1998
I must object!!!!! killall works fine on some systems (e.g.: Linux) but
on Solaris, killall does just that --- it kills ALL processes.
At 10:25 AM 9/25/98 +1000, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 14:35:45 +1000
>From: PayPC System Mail Subscriber <spammail at quanta.paypc.com>
>To: samba at samba.anu.edu.au
>Subject: Re: Start and stop the samba server
>Message-ID: <199809240435.OAA11327 at quanta.paypc.com>
>> Is there a good way to stop and restart the samba server...
>> for example to have it re read the smb.conf, without rebooting the
>> actual pc?
>> if I should kill a process should I kill them all ??? if so is there an
>> efficent way to do this?
>Heheheh, you guys should read your unix command line help. :) The command
>you want is:
>killall -HUP smbd
>killall kills (or sends the specified signal) to all exectuables which the
>I've never had problems just SIGTERM'ing (no signal specified to
>kill/killall) smbd's on "live" sessions. The only problem I'd envisage
>be with oplocked files (smbstatus is your friend!).... in which case -HUP
>would be the preferred technique - though the changes aren't applied to
>already-established sessions. It sounds like samba automagically re-reads
>its smb.conf anyhow; I excerpt from the current samba man page:
> The configuration file, and any files that it includes,
> are automatically reloaded every minute, if they change.
> You can force a reload by sending a SIGHUP to the server.
> Reloading the configuration file will not affect connec-
> tions to any service that is already established. Either
> the user will have to disconnect from the service, or smbd
> killed and restarted.
>So if you have a "dead time" auto-logout (as I do), the changes will be
>picked up eventually. If you wish to force an immediate change, than
>SIGTERMing the sessions is the only way (that is, kill/killall without a
>specified signal name).
>Ya know, every time I install/radically alter/remove vital system services
>from my always-busy intranet server box without having to run for another
>reboot multiple times, or experience any downtime or interruption of service
>whatsoever, I thank whatever wisdom resides within me which prodded me into
>deep-sixing my NT4 servers. (We also manage to get one box to do what
>required two boxes to perform satisfactorily, and then some.).
More information about the samba