Comment # 15 on bug 1117483 from Franck Bui

(In reply to Jaime Caama�o Ruiz from comment #14)
> I never claimed that. I just tried to explain there are reasons to consider
> not restarting the service. I take it that you have a strong opinion that
> leaving the old service running is the worst option.
> 

In *general* I think so.

> >The macros are for the common cases, if any package chooses to implement >something hackish for their restart then they should implement that in their >own.
> 
> There is not need to implement anything hackish. Upstream %systemd_postun
> macro "as is" does not restart the service. What is the hack exactly?

Sorry it seems that I'm not clear neither ;)

>From my point of view, the hack is the API proposed by SUSE to allow turning
the restart of services *globally* via a environment variable
DISABLE_RESTART_ON_UPDATE. IOW if this variable is set to yes (via
/etc/sysconfig/xxx), then *all* packages won't restart on update which really
sounds wrong and dangerous.

Services might need to prevent restarting on update (although the only "valid"
use case I can see is that the service doesn't support restarting yet) but in
this case this should be done at the package level not through a global
environment variable like it's proposed currently.

Giving the illusion to sysadmin that setting globally
DISABLE_RESTART_ON_UPDATE=yes will magically work is a bad idea IMHO.

But yes a better alternative would be to provide a new macro (similarly to what
upstream does) whose name would explicitly tell that restarting is not done.

Hope that makes more sense.