On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Ihar `Philips` Filipau wrote: > Well, you can't satisfy all. And the problem (in the particular case) > isn't even performance critical: everything what would do the work in > less than half second is OK. Most fool-proof solution wins.
But that's contradictory: most fool-proof is looping over all possible values for fd, but on many systems thats >> 5sec. (10billion on mine = ~1min) > > > Either way, though, there seems to be agreement that this is a > > > 'distcc' problem and not a 'paludis' problem? > > > > [still interested in the consensus here] > > > IMO. Implement fool-prof generic method. Add /proc/*/fd trick for > Linux (as most commonly used platform). Sounds like the plan. > Code from Lennart's hint satisfies most of the requirements. > closefrom() syscall: let somebody else who has access to the > supporting platform add a new define and code path for it. Ditto > /dev/fd. Also sounds reasonable. > I'm no distcc maintainer, but IMHO there is no need consensus here for > a pure technical question on how to close fds. Do not plan for > problem - solve the problems as they come. Especially considering that > in the case they are going to be easy to solve. Sorry, I think my referent got lost... I meant consensus on the fact that this is distcc's problem (closing fd's it didn't open), and not paludis's problem. (Seems like people agree it's fixable easily-enough in distcc, but I wasn't sure if this was usually considered a problem that the daemonizing process was responsible for.) Best, Ben __ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/ To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc