Andrew Deason <[email protected]> writes: > Russ Allbery <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Is there any reason not to do this? If not, I can just make this >> change in the Debian package. I don't recall why start-stop-daemon was >> used there in the first place. > Hmm, I can't think of much. Does start-stop-daemon do anything like > clean the environment, etc? Has afsd always exited after mount? I suspect that at some point in the very distant past, afsd didn't exit after mount. Checking the Git history, Debian has been using start-stop-daemon to start afsd since 2000-11-05, which would correspond to 1.0.snap20001106-2. I have no idea how afsd worked then. :) However, start-stop-daemon itself doesn't background anything unless you tell it to explicitly, and we aren't telling it to. So I think there's some other problem here; it looks from the original bug report like afsd itself is exiting before the cache is set up and AFS is mounted. > Does it matter if some afsd children only fork() without doing anything > like daemon()izing? Yes, probably. At least you probably don't want them attached to a tty or any of the other bad things that can happen if they don't daemonize. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
