On Tue, 22 Oct 2019, Jesse Smith wrote: > > any ideas how it could be possible for process to be discovered by > > ps(1), but not pidof(1)?
> I can think of a few possibilities, though they seem unlikely. One is > that the process could be crashing and restarting, making it a zombie or in D state, doing disc I/O… more likely even. > for brief periods of time. Testing pidof with the "-z" flag would fill > in the "holes" in the test output if that theory is correct. Also: start-stop-daemon --status should probably be used ipv pidof. (Even its manpage says so.) bye, //mirabilos -- tarent solutions GmbH Rochusstraße 2-4, D-53123 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/ Tel: +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235 HRB 5168 (AG Bonn) • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg
