John Peacock wrote: > Lars Roland wrote: >> This would be ideal in order to minimize code duplication and give >> users maximum choice (supervice/rnuit/deamonize/...). > > OK, I committed the code that Lars submitted (with my little change), > then I applied the patch that Matt proposed (minus some whitespace > changes that obscured what was actually happening). There seems to be a > few more things that refer to "daemonize" that need to be eliminated. > And qpsmtpd-prefork seems to be mixing up the adaptive logging plugin > (too many lines are tagged for later display). > > And more importantly, someone needs to write the daemonize wrapper > code... ;-)
I'm looking forward to testing this code. > - who's still kind of overwhelmed with dealing with bad financial > decision that left a core server without a) redundancy or b) backup At least it ws a financial decision, not a technical one! R.
