On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Stas Bekman wrote:

> Randy Kobes wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Stas Bekman wrote:
[ .. ]
> >>p.s. I'd let you guys figure it out on win32 and once you
> >>are happy we will see how to make that behavior similar on
> >>other platforms. Of course if you need to change things in
> >>the non-win32 area, please do so. As mentioned before the
> >>left over pid file happens on unix as well, but it's not a
> >>critical issue there, since unices rotate pids and don't
> >>immediately re-use them.
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure there is a complete solution here ... That's
> > a good point, Stas - the changes have to go into
> > TestServer.pm, as someone can run t/TEST in the same way
> > as t/SMOKE. And so we can't rely on the Win32::Process
> > object being available. However, if we fall back to using
> > t/logs/httpd.pid, then in some circumstances this pid may
> > have been recycled to another process, and killing that
> > wouldn't be good ... We could look up the process info
> > using Win32::Process::Info, but that module's not included
> > by default on ActivePerl.
> >
> > I think Steve has a good point that, on Win32, it's a bit
> > too dangerous to go around killing processes that may not
> > be Apache ones.
>
> I completely agree with Steve, I wasn't objecting to this point ;)

Oh, I didn't mean to imply you disagreed :)

> > Given that, it seems to me better to use
> > Win32::Process::Info to get the name of the process, and
> > kill that if the name is 'Apache.exe' (of course, this
> > isn't foolproof, as it may be a legitimate Apache process
> > started from somewhere else, but one has to draw a line ..).
> > Stas, would you object to making Win32::Process::Info a
> > requirement on Win32 for Apache-Test? I'll supply ppm
> > versions of it (and also the required Win32::API), so
> > for most users it should be easy to install.
>
> Can we try first to see if we can get away without making A-T depend on
> Win32::Process::Info? If anything else fails, than it's OK I guess.

I think Steve's latest patch is a good compromise on that
without using Win32::Process::Info ...

-- 
best regards,
randy

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to