On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 07:24:39PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2016/02/01 15:02, Joerg Jung wrote:
> > What about smtpd, should be similar, no?
>
> This would do the trick. It loses the getrlimit/setrlimit dance that
> config_process() normally does, but I'm not sure if that is really
>
On 2016/02/01 15:02, Joerg Jung wrote:
> What about smtpd, should be similar, no?
This would do the trick. It loses the getrlimit/setrlimit dance that
config_process() normally does, but I'm not sure if that is really
needed for the parent process anyway (mine only has 11 FDs so it's
not in any
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 07:24:39PM +, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2016/02/01 15:02, Joerg Jung wrote:
> > What about smtpd, should be similar, no?
>
> This would do the trick. It loses the getrlimit/setrlimit dance that
> config_process() normally does, but I'm not sure if that is really
>
moved from misc.
On 2016-01-28, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
>> Well, we "tradionally" had setproctitle("[priv]") in the parent. I
>> changed the tradition to setproctitle("parent").
>>
>> I have no objections with changing this in the parent (but keeping the
>> setproctitles
> On 01 Feb 2016, at 14:53, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> moved from misc.
>
> On 2016-01-28, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
>>> Well, we "tradionally" had setproctitle("[priv]") in the parent. I
>>> changed the tradition to setproctitle("parent").
>>>
On 2016/02/01 15:02, Joerg Jung wrote:
>
> > On 01 Feb 2016, at 14:53, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> >
> > moved from misc.
> >
> > On 2016-01-28, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> >>> Well, we "tradionally" had setproctitle("[priv]") in the parent. I
> >>>