Is there an advantage to allowing multiple copies of the daemon to run, instead of having it do one of the following:
- Either kill previous instance(s) of the daemon and replace it with a new running instance, or - Abort the start of the new instance when a previous running instance is detected? On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Paul Menzel < [email protected]> wrote: > Dear Mike, > > > as always, thank you for your fast response! > > > Am Sonntag, den 26.08.2012, 21:31 +0200 schrieb Mike Gabriel: > > > On So 26 Aug 2012 15:15:40 CEST Paul Menzel wrote: > > > > > Dear X2Go folks, > > > > > > > > > while looking into sessions which are still active on the server after > > > the client was suspended and could not reconnect after resume, I > noticed > > > that `/usr/sbin/x2gocleansessions` seems to not properly exit. It is > > > somehow run in background and does not exit. > > > > > > $ /usr/sbin/x2gocleansessions --help > > > $ echo $? > > > 0 > > > $ /usr/sbin/x2gocleansessions --version > > > $ echo $? > > > 0 > > > > > > They are still listed by `ps aux | grep x2go`. > > > > X2Go clean sessions script is a daemon script. It should be possible > > to execute multiple instances, but it should fork into background. > > There is no --help and --version available, so these optioned commands > > will just start another instance of the daemon. > > Interesting, thank you for the explanation. > > Is there an advantage over letting the user to decide to start in the > foreground or in the background by using the ampersand »&«? > > > Thanks, > > Paul > > _______________________________________________ > X2Go-Dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/x2go-dev >
_______________________________________________ X2Go-Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/x2go-dev
