On 17 Feb 2010, at 12:11 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:

+ *) support/htcacheclean: Teach it how to write a pid file (modelled on + httpd's writing of a pid file) so that it becomes possible to run
+     more than one instance of htcacheclean on the same machine.
+     [Graham Leggett]

Based on my own initial confusion of the "becomes possible" language
(which isn't strictly true), I suspect that this feature description
would be more readily understood if this stressed the ease of
termination by pid file, since the admin/script no longer has to check
ps output (which certainly is a bigger benefit when there are multiple
instances, which would require looking at the path parameter).
Mileage varies, of course.

s/possible/practical/ I think makes more sense.

"killall <processname>" is a really awful way to kill a process :)

+ " -P Specify PIDFILE as the file to write the pid file to." NL

s/write the pid file to/write the pid to/

Just fixed this in r910735.

+            apr_file_printf(file, "%ld" APR_EOL_STR, (long) mypid);

APR_PID_T_FMT and no (long) cast

server/log.c is guilty too, fixed it in r910747.

+            apr_file_close(file);
+        }
+        else if (!isdaemon) {
+            apr_file_printf(errfile,
+ "Could not write the pid file '%s': %s" APR_EOL_STR, + pidfile, apr_strerror(status, errmsg, sizeof errmsg));
+        }

why not just let this be a fatal error?  the user specified an invalid
path in all likelihood and needs to fix it

We've daemonised at this point, so we can't fail, as the end user won't know it's happened. There is also an established pattern in here that when daemonised, it stays silent, which probably isn't a good idea, but would need to be fixed separately.

One option is to use syslog, will need to see how httpd does it so the Windows side works too.

Also, I suspect that cleaning up the pid file on exit would be anticipated.

Also fixed, svn is off and on and so will commit when it's back up.

server/log.c is also guilty of the same thing, would it make sense to fix both at the same time?

Regards,
Graham
--

Reply via email to