Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
On 26.06.2011 01:45, bradleymccrorey wrote: I'll be watching this quite closely. We run thousands of TC6 instances onsite here, and are a daemontools shop. This change breaks daemontools, as the svc command will attempt to stop the tomcat service by sending a TERM to the catalina.sh process, which leaves the child java process still running. For one customer who insists on TC7, I've had to take the measure of changing the catalina.sh script to use the old method for now. This is not maintainable, however. Should there be a bug filed somewhere for this? Cheers, Bradley McCrorey Did you follow the later messages in this discusison thread? I made an error in not including all quotes use din catalina.sh in my simpl test script. So when using the correct scripts, the eval did *not* leave a copy of the shel process hanging around. If you think there is a problem, you can discuss the technical details here, and if the list doesn't find a solution for you, you can open a bug. Regards, Rainer Rainer Jung-3 wrote: Since Mladens change r918873 in March 2010 we use eval instead of exec in the shell scripts. The svn log says: Use eval instead direct call or exec command so that arguments with spaces are properly handled Eval leaves a copy of the shell process hanging around until Tomcat shutdown. I want to experiment with different solutions, but have no idea, what kind of whitespace use the switch from exec to eval was supposed to change. Mladen or whoever else understood this: can you give an example which didn't work with the exec based scripts? Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
Rainer Jung-3 wrote: Did you follow the later messages in this discusison thread? I made an error in not including all quotes use din catalina.sh in my simpl test script. So when using the correct scripts, the eval did *not* leave a copy of the shel process hanging around. I certainly did, but obviously didn't understand that things were working as expected. Please let me know if I'm misunderstanding. However, if you're saying that the default scripts are working, then I'll definitely have to dispute this. Observe: [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf test]# curl -L http://www.fightrice.com/mirrors/apache/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.16/bin/apache-tomcat-7.0.16.tar.gz |tar xzf - % Total% Received % Xferd Average Speed TimeTime Time Current Dload Upload Total SpentLeft Speed 100 7067k 100 7067k0 0 10.0M 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 10.2M [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf test]# cd apache-tomcat-7.0.16/ [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf apache-tomcat-7.0.16]# bin/catalina.sh run Using CATALINA_BASE: /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16 Using CATALINA_HOME: /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16 Using CATALINA_TMPDIR: /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/temp Using JRE_HOME:/usr Using CLASSPATH: /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/bin/bootstrap.jar:/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/bin/tomcat-juli.jar Jun 26, 2011 10:50:22 AM org.apache.catalina.core.AprLifecycleListener init ... INFO: Starting ProtocolHandler [http-bio-8080] Jun 26, 2011 10:50:22 AM org.apache.coyote.AbstractProtocol start INFO: Starting ProtocolHandler [ajp-bio-8009] Jun 26, 2011 10:50:22 AM org.apache.catalina.startup.Catalina start INFO: Server startup in 648 ms [1]+ Stopped bin/catalina.sh run [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf apache-tomcat-7.0.16]# bg [1]+ bin/catalina.sh run [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf apache-tomcat-7.0.16]# ps auxww |grep catalina root 1611 0.0 0.4 4576 1116 pts/0S10:50 0:00 /bin/sh bin/catalina.sh run root 1622 14.5 11.0 650752 28236 pts/0Sl 10:50 0:01 /usr/bin/java -Djava.util.logging.config.file=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/conf/logging.properties -Djava.util.logging.manager=org.apache.juli.ClassLoaderLogManager -Djava.endorsed.dirs=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/endorsed -classpath /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/bin/bootstrap.jar:/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/bin/tomcat-juli.jar -Dcatalina.base=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16 -Dcatalina.home=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16 -Djava.io.tmpdir=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/temp org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap start root 1643 0.0 0.2 4000 660 pts/0S+ 10:50 0:00 grep catalina You can clearly see here that there are two processes: one for the shell script, and one for the actual java process. Is this not what I should be seeing? Cheers, Bradley McCrorey -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Using-eval-vs.-exec-in-shell-scripts-tp31884910p31931562.html Sent from the Tomcat - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
On 26.06.2011 17:35, bradleymccrorey wrote: Rainer Jung-3 wrote: Did you follow the later messages in this discusison thread? I made an error in not including all quotes use din catalina.sh in my simpl test script. So when using the correct scripts, the eval did *not* leave a copy of the shel process hanging around. I certainly did, but obviously didn't understand that things were working as expected. Please let me know if I'm misunderstanding. However, if you're saying that the default scripts are working, then I'll definitely have to dispute this. I am :) Observe: [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf test]# curl -L http://www.fightrice.com/mirrors/apache/tomcat/tomcat-7/v7.0.16/bin/apache-tomcat-7.0.16.tar.gz |tar xzf - % Total% Received % Xferd Average Speed TimeTime Time Current Dload Upload Total SpentLeft Speed 100 7067k 100 7067k0 0 10.0M 0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 10.2M [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf test]# cd apache-tomcat-7.0.16/ [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf apache-tomcat-7.0.16]# bin/catalina.sh run Using CATALINA_BASE: /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16 Using CATALINA_HOME: /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16 Using CATALINA_TMPDIR: /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/temp Using JRE_HOME:/usr Using CLASSPATH: /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/bin/bootstrap.jar:/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/bin/tomcat-juli.jar Jun 26, 2011 10:50:22 AM org.apache.catalina.core.AprLifecycleListener init ... INFO: Starting ProtocolHandler [http-bio-8080] Jun 26, 2011 10:50:22 AM org.apache.coyote.AbstractProtocol start INFO: Starting ProtocolHandler [ajp-bio-8009] Jun 26, 2011 10:50:22 AM org.apache.catalina.startup.Catalina start INFO: Server startup in 648 ms [1]+ Stopped bin/catalina.sh run [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf apache-tomcat-7.0.16]# bg [1]+ bin/catalina.sh run [root@c37f9170a86c583d8a16fc7e60e759cf apache-tomcat-7.0.16]# ps auxww |grep catalina root 1611 0.0 0.4 4576 1116 pts/0S10:50 0:00 /bin/sh bin/catalina.sh run root 1622 14.5 11.0 650752 28236 pts/0Sl 10:50 0:01 /usr/bin/java -Djava.util.logging.config.file=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/conf/logging.properties -Djava.util.logging.manager=org.apache.juli.ClassLoaderLogManager -Djava.endorsed.dirs=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/endorsed -classpath /root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/bin/bootstrap.jar:/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/bin/tomcat-juli.jar -Dcatalina.base=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16 -Dcatalina.home=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16 -Djava.io.tmpdir=/root/test/apache-tomcat-7.0.16/temp org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap start root 1643 0.0 0.2 4000 660 pts/0S+ 10:50 0:00 grep catalina You can clearly see here that there are two processes: one for the shell script, and one for the actual java process. Is this not what I should be seeing? You should, bot only when using run, which is precisely meant to not decouple the console from the process. If you use start, which is the normal sart method, your observations should be different. Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
Rainer Jung-3 wrote: You can clearly see here that there are two processes: one for the shell script, and one for the actual java process. Is this not what I should be seeing? You should, bot only when using run, which is precisely meant to not decouple the console from the process. Hm. Perhaps we're trying to achieve different things here. With the old scripts, the behavior of the run switch was that the process would not fork, and would remain in the foreground, and only have one process (the java process). The new version seems to imitate this by leaving the running java process in the foreground of the current shell. However, there are still *2* processes: one for the catalina.sh, and one for java. This is a fundamental change in the way the script behaves. Does this clarify what I'm trying to achieve? Sorry if I'm being thick-headed, and thanks very much for your consideration. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Using-eval-vs.-exec-in-shell-scripts-tp31884910p31931669.html Sent from the Tomcat - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
On 26.06.2011 17:59, bradleymccrorey wrote: Rainer Jung-3 wrote: You can clearly see here that there are two processes: one for the shell script, and one for the actual java process. Is this not what I should be seeing? You should, bot only when using run, which is precisely meant to not decouple the console from the process. Hm. Perhaps we're trying to achieve different things here. With the old scripts, the behavior of the run switch was that the process would not fork, and would remain in the foreground, and only have one process (the java process). The new version seems to imitate this by leaving the running java process in the foreground of the current shell. However, there are still *2* processes: one for the catalina.sh, and one for java. This is a fundamental change in the way the script behaves. Does this clarify what I'm trying to achieve? Sorry if I'm being thick-headed, and thanks very much for your consideration. Fixed for run in r1139904. Please try the following change (eval - eval exec): Index: catalina.sh === --- catalina.sh (revision 1139151) +++ catalina.sh (working copy) @@ -312,7 +312,7 @@ echo Using Security Manager fi shift -eval \$_RUNJAVA\ \$LOGGING_CONFIG\ $JAVA_OPTS $CATALINA_OPTS \ +eval exec \$_RUNJAVA\ \$LOGGING_CONFIG\ $JAVA_OPTS $CATALINA_OPTS \ -Djava.endorsed.dirs=\$JAVA_ENDORSED_DIRS\ -classpath \$CLASSPATH\ \ -Djava.security.manager \ -Djava.security.policy==\$CATALINA_BASE/conf/catalina.policy\ \ @@ -321,7 +321,7 @@ -Djava.io.tmpdir=\$CATALINA_TMPDIR\ \ org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap $@ start else -eval \$_RUNJAVA\ \$LOGGING_CONFIG\ $JAVA_OPTS $CATALINA_OPTS \ +eval exec \$_RUNJAVA\ \$LOGGING_CONFIG\ $JAVA_OPTS $CATALINA_OPTS \ -Djava.endorsed.dirs=\$JAVA_ENDORSED_DIRS\ -classpath \$CLASSPATH\ \ -Dcatalina.base=\$CATALINA_BASE\ \ -Dcatalina.home=\$CATALINA_HOME\ \ Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
I'll be watching this quite closely. We run thousands of TC6 instances onsite here, and are a daemontools shop. This change breaks daemontools, as the svc command will attempt to stop the tomcat service by sending a TERM to the catalina.sh process, which leaves the child java process still running. For one customer who insists on TC7, I've had to take the measure of changing the catalina.sh script to use the old method for now. This is not maintainable, however. Should there be a bug filed somewhere for this? Cheers, Bradley McCrorey Rainer Jung-3 wrote: Since Mladens change r918873 in March 2010 we use eval instead of exec in the shell scripts. The svn log says: Use eval instead direct call or exec command so that arguments with spaces are properly handled Eval leaves a copy of the shell process hanging around until Tomcat shutdown. I want to experiment with different solutions, but have no idea, what kind of whitespace use the switch from exec to eval was supposed to change. Mladen or whoever else understood this: can you give an example which didn't work with the exec based scripts? Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Using-eval-vs.-exec-in-shell-scripts-tp31884910p31928774.html Sent from the Tomcat - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
Since Mladens change r918873 in March 2010 we use eval instead of exec in the shell scripts. The svn log says: Use eval instead direct call or exec command so that arguments with spaces are properly handled Eval leaves a copy of the shell process hanging around until Tomcat shutdown. I want to experiment with different solutions, but have no idea, what kind of whitespace use the switch from exec to eval was supposed to change. Mladen or whoever else understood this: can you give an example which didn't work with the exec based scripts? Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
Which script ? Could you send us the svn link ? 2011/6/20 Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de: Since Mladens change r918873 in March 2010 we use eval instead of exec in the shell scripts. The svn log says: Use eval instead direct call or exec command so that arguments with spaces are properly handled Eval leaves a copy of the shell process hanging around until Tomcat shutdown. I want to experiment with different solutions, but have no idea, what kind of whitespace use the switch from exec to eval was supposed to change. Mladen or whoever else understood this: can you give an example which didn't work with the exec based scripts? Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
On 06/20/2011 01:39 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: Since Mladens change r918873 in March 2010 we use eval instead of exec in the shell scripts. The svn log says: Use eval instead direct call or exec command so that arguments with spaces are properly handled Mladen or whoever else understood this: can you give an example which didn't work with the exec based scripts? eg. export JAVA_OPTS=$JAVA_OPTS \-XX:OnError=gdb - %p\ ... and We eval for start/stop so we can get the pid. since eval and exec behave differently when handling quoted args this was giving different results on catalina.sh run/start Regards -- ^TM - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
On 20.06.2011 14:52, Mladen Turk wrote: On 06/20/2011 01:39 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: Since Mladens change r918873 in March 2010 we use eval instead of exec in the shell scripts. The svn log says: Use eval instead direct call or exec command so that arguments with spaces are properly handled Mladen or whoever else understood this: can you give an example which didn't work with the exec based scripts? eg. export JAVA_OPTS=$JAVA_OPTS \-XX:OnError=gdb - %p\ Thanks for the example. ... and We eval for start/stop so we can get the pid. And this is broken now. We used $! with exec and we still use it with eval. But with eval $! returns the pid of a child shell and the java process id a child of that pid. since eval and exec behave differently when handling quoted args this was giving different results on catalina.sh run/start Yes, I got it. I experimented with eval exec (sic!) and it looks promising. The following tiny script is useful for experimenting: #!/bin/sh dir='/var/tmp/with spaces' arg1='-Dprop1=val1 with space' arg2=-DpropX=y -DpropY=Z args=\$arg1\ $arg2 mkdir -p $dir cp -p /usr/bin/sleep $dir echo Starting using eval ... eval \$dir\/sleep 60 $args pid=$! echo PID is: $pid ps -p $pid kill -9 $pid echo Starting using eval exec ... eval exec \$dir\/sleep 60 $args pid=$! echo PID is: $pid ps -p $pid kill -9 $pid rm -rf $dir I think eval exec is the right solution. Seems to behave nice for whitespace and doesn't add an intermediate process between the startup script and the Java process. Regards, Rainer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Using eval vs. exec in shell scripts
On 06/20/2011 03:12 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: ... and We eval for start/stop so we can get the pid. And this is broken now. We used $! with exec and we still use it with eval. But with eval $! returns the pid of a child shell and the java process id a child of that pid. Are you sure? cat EOF foo.sh #!/bin/sh eval sleep \$@ echo Sleep pid: \$! exit 0 EOF [mturk@fc14x86v0 Temp]$ sh foo.sh 30 Sleep pid: 3998 [mturk@fc14x86v0 Temp]$ ps -ef | grep sleep ... mturk 3998 1 0 15:58 pts/300:00:00 sleep 30 ... Regards -- ^TM - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
