Randy McMurchy wrote: > DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/09/05 21:12 CST: > > >>Okay, does the spamd script that you use set PIDFILE? > > > Because I'm the one that started this thread by reporting what I > felt was an error in the functions, I am curious if anyone else has > seen the issue I see. I would hate the DJ is fighting something that > really doesn't exist. > > What I am seeing using the bootscripts specified in the LFS and BLFS > SVN book is behavior that when a BLFS bootscript is called with the > 'status' parameter, and the referenced daemon is known not to be > running, the script returns that it *is* running with a PID that > doesn't exist. > > Earlier today I killed the syslog daemons and ran the script with > the 'status' parameter and things reported correctly. However, with > BLFS bootscripts using /usr/sbin/daemonname, things don't report the > same. > > Let's make sure there is really an issue here. DJ, if I can help > to ensure there is really an issue, let me know what I need to do. >
I can not believe I did that...again!!! No. It's definately a problem with the handling of pidofproc as demonstrated by the test changes to -status in any bootscript. The patches that I had submitted earlier were so stupidly broken...grr! Anyway, in the last one, I completely destroyed loadproc and killproc opperation. The solution, as is usually the case, should have been very easy, but I overcomplicated the previous patch. I've a little more testing to do before I send a partially tested patch to list again. Handling of -p $pidfile must still be tested yet for the latest (much easier) change, but definately don't use the previous patches. Sorry for any inconvience...I should have it fixed tonight. -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
