[asterisk-dev] Question about hup_handler & deadlocks

[Tilghman Lesher]

On Saturday 23 September 2006 22:18, Jay Hoover wrote:
> Can anyone enlighten me about why ast_module_reload needs to be
> called from the SIGHUP handler? I see that this was added quite a
> few years ago (may '01), but I can't find anything in the code that
> explains the reasoning behind it.

Generally speaking, SIGHUP on many daemon processes today causes the
configuration files to be re-read.  The 'reload' routine in modules
generally does that operation.  Given that we have an alternative
method of effecting a reload from the bash command line ('asterisk -rx
reload'), I don't see the handling of SIGHUP in this way to be
critical.

-- 
Tilghman