Re: please make SIG_GRACEFUL configurable
> > Okay. -1 on the change to SIGWINCH. Restore SIGUSR1 on all platforms. > > How are you going to make that work on older versions of Linux again? I don't use older versions of Linux. They have security holes. My preference is for the signal to be configurable and for it to be activated by running httpd with a simple argument, just like on win32. Failing that, I'd rather have httpd be broken on those platforms that are unusable for Web servers rather than be broken on those platforms that are usable for Web servers. That means the universal default must be SIGUSR1, since SIGWINCH is an entirely unreliable signal that isn't even supported on all platforms. Roy
Re: please make SIG_GRACEFUL configurable
> Can we _please_ agree on semantics, finally, to bring httpd/win32 and httpd/others > in sync again? We use the -k start|stop|restart semantic, could easily add > graceful with it's proper meaning (and make restart a hard restart, as it was in > the very early win32 version. +1 -- I really prefer using the executable to determine the mechanism, since that is the problem we now face (hundreds of deployed scripts and books that say "kill -USR1 `cat httpd.pid`") Roy
Re: please make SIG_GRACEFUL configurable
On Thursday 30 August 2001 13:22, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 08:04:03PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote: > > On Wednesday 29 August 2001 18:21, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > > > This was discussed at length before, and it was decided that we should > > use the same signal on all platforms for all MPMs (assuming the platform > > supports signals). Making this be a different signal on different > > platforms is just plain wrong. > > Okay. -1 on the change to SIGWINCH. Restore SIGUSR1 on all platforms. How are you going to make that work on older versions of Linux again? Ryan __ Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: please make SIG_GRACEFUL configurable
On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 08:04:03PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote: > On Wednesday 29 August 2001 18:21, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > This was discussed at length before, and it was decided that we should > use the same signal on all platforms for all MPMs (assuming the platform > supports signals). Making this be a different signal on different platforms > is just plain wrong. Okay. -1 on the change to SIGWINCH. Restore SIGUSR1 on all platforms. Roy
Re: please make SIG_GRACEFUL configurable
I agree. AS/400 supports signals but SIGWINCH is not supported. We end up using SIGUSR1 anyway. Rob Simonson [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/29/2001 08:21:33 PM This has been on my to-do list for ages. The decision to change from SIGUSR1 to SIGWINCH just because a particular old version of Linux threads happens to suck was a bad decision. Hard-coding the value within a bunch of places in httpd was just bad coding. I would really appreciate it if someone coded up a patch to add an AP_SIG_GRACEFUL definition, apply it everywhere in the code (and in the control scripts), and then make it configurable using configure [default=SIGUSR1]. To make it even better, we should have a way to signal it using httpd itself httpd restart httpd graceful httpd stop would check for an existing process and send it the appropriate signal. That way we wouldn't be spreading implementation assumptions throughout the support code. Roy
Re: please make SIG_GRACEFUL configurable
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:21 PM > and then make it configurable using configure [default=SIGUSR1]. To make > it even better, we should have a way to signal it using httpd itself > > httpd restart > httpd graceful > httpd stop > > would check for an existing process and send it the appropriate signal. > That way we wouldn't be spreading implementation assumptions throughout > the support code. Can we _please_ agree on semantics, finally, to bring httpd/win32 and httpd/others in sync again? We use the -k start|stop|restart semantic, could easily add graceful with it's proper meaning (and make restart a hard restart, as it was in the very early win32 version. Bill
Re: please make SIG_GRACEFUL configurable
On Wednesday 29 August 2001 18:21, Roy T. Fielding wrote: This was discussed at length before, and it was decided that we should use the same signal on all platforms for all MPMs (assuming the platform supports signals). Making this be a different signal on different platforms is just plain wrong. Ryan > This has been on my to-do list for ages. The decision to change from > SIGUSR1 to SIGWINCH just because a particular old version of Linux threads > happens to suck was a bad decision. Hard-coding the value within a > bunch of places in httpd was just bad coding. > > I would really appreciate it if someone coded up a patch to add an > >AP_SIG_GRACEFUL > > definition, apply it everywhere in the code (and in the control scripts), > and then make it configurable using configure [default=SIGUSR1]. To make > it even better, we should have a way to signal it using httpd itself > > httpd restart > httpd graceful > httpd stop > > would check for an existing process and send it the appropriate signal. > That way we wouldn't be spreading implementation assumptions throughout > the support code. > > Roy -- __ Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: please make SIG_GRACEFUL configurable
On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > it even better, we should have a way to signal it using httpd itself > > httpd restart > httpd graceful > httpd stop > > would check for an existing process and send it the appropriate signal. > That way we wouldn't be spreading implementation assumptions throughout > the support code. apachectl already has some values substituted at configure time... might as well just substitute in the requisite signals as well. --Cliff -- Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charlottesville, VA
please make SIG_GRACEFUL configurable
This has been on my to-do list for ages. The decision to change from SIGUSR1 to SIGWINCH just because a particular old version of Linux threads happens to suck was a bad decision. Hard-coding the value within a bunch of places in httpd was just bad coding. I would really appreciate it if someone coded up a patch to add an AP_SIG_GRACEFUL definition, apply it everywhere in the code (and in the control scripts), and then make it configurable using configure [default=SIGUSR1]. To make it even better, we should have a way to signal it using httpd itself httpd restart httpd graceful httpd stop would check for an existing process and send it the appropriate signal. That way we wouldn't be spreading implementation assumptions throughout the support code. Roy
