DJ Lucas wrote:
>>> Never mind. $$ is not actually incrementing, but I don't know what
>>> processes pidof is finding when running that script. Creating a second
>>> functions script with only statusproc and getpids using the same 'pidof
>>> -o $$ -o $PPID -x "${1}"' gives the proper result. It looks as if pidof
>>> it's finding it's own PID but that can't be either because it does not
>>> find itself in the second example. I'm at a loss. Will revisit after
>>> some sleep.
Okay..I'm not sure how (if) this affects the LSB function for pidofproc,
but it does do the right thing with the output. I've still not tested
this thouroughly, expecially WRT pidofproc!!!
-- DJ Lucas
--- lfs-bootscripts-3.2.2-orig/lfs/init.d/functions 2005-07-05 01:09:05.000000000 -0500
+++ lfs-bootscripts-3.2.2/lfs/init.d/functions 2005-08-08 18:53:52.000000000 -0500
@@ -426,7 +426,7 @@
{
local pidfile=""
local lpids=""
- local pidlist=""
+ pidlist=""
while true
do
case "${1}" in
@@ -455,20 +455,20 @@
return 3 # Program is not running
fi
- lpids=`head -n 1 ${pidfile}`
- for pid in ${lpids}
+ lpids=`head -n 1 "${pidfile}"`
+ for pid in "${lpids}"
do
if [ "${pid}" -ne "$$" -a "${pid}" -ne "${PPID}" ]; then
kill -0 "${pid}" > /dev/null &&
pidlist="${pidlist} ${pid}"
fi
- echo ${pidlist}
+ echo "${pidlist}"
test -z "${pidlist}" && return 1 # Program is dead, pidfile exists
return 0
done
else
- pidof -o $$ -o $PPID -x "${1}"
+ pidlist=`pidof -o "${$}" -o "${PPID}" -x "${1}"`
fi
if [ "$?" != "0" ]; then
@@ -479,10 +479,10 @@
# This will ensure compatibility with previous LFS Bootscripts
getpids()
{
- if [ -z "${PIDFILE}" ]; then
- pidlist=`pidofproc -p "${PIDFILE}" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ if [ -n "${PIDFILE}" ]; then
+ pidofproc -p "${PIDFILE}" "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
else
- pidlist=`pidofproc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+ pidofproc "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
fi
base="${1##*/}"
}
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
