On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 02:30:31PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Jos Backus wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 01:45:45AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > OK. We already have one of those. We call it "init". 8-).
> >
> > Feature-wise init and svscan/supervise don't quite match; svscan has more
Jos Backus wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 01:45:45AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > OK. We already have one of those. We call it "init". 8-).
>
> Feature-wise init and svscan/supervise don't quite match; svscan has more
> features, one of which being that it doesn't use a single control file
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 01:45:45AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Jos Backus wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 02:45:18AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > > Why use pid files at all if you could be using a process supervisor instead?
> > >
> > > Who supervises the supervisor?
> >
> > Heh. The sup
On Friday 14 November 2003 01:45 am, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Jos Backus wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 02:45:18AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > >
> > > There are also the small issues of ordering (the reason you can't
> > > just run everything out of /etc/ttys via init in the first place),
> >
Jos Backus wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 02:45:18AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > > Why use pid files at all if you could be using a process supervisor instead?
> >
> > Who supervises the supervisor?
>
> Heh. The supervisor should be small and robust, like init. Has init died on
> you recentl
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 02:45:18AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > Why use pid files at all if you could be using a process supervisor instead?
>
> Who supervises the supervisor?
Heh. The supervisor should be small and robust, like init. Has init died on
you recently? Do you want to solve this pr
* Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20031113 11:46]:
> Jos Backus wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> > > 1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:wheel
> > > 2 - write your PID to /var/run/myapp/myapp.pid where /var/run/myapp/
> > > is
Jos Backus wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> > If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> > PID file before or after the setuid?
> >
> > Two methods exists AFAIK:
> >
> > 1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:whee
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> PID file before or after the setuid?
After of course, since to do so before is using UID 0 to solve the wrong
problem and creates the removal problem.
> Any sugges
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> PID file before or after the setuid?
>
> Two methods exists AFAIK:
>
> 1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:wheel
> 2 - write your PID to /va
Nielsen wrote:
> Christopher Vance wrote:
> > May I suggest a different feature: the ability to mark an open file
> > (not just its fd) 'remove on close', with permission checked at mark
> > time rather than close time (this status forgotten if not permitted
> > when set) and the unlink actually do
Christopher Vance wrote:
May I suggest a different feature: the ability to mark an open file
(not just its fd) 'remove on close', with permission checked at mark
time rather than close time (this status forgotten if not permitted
when set) and the unlink actually done at close time only if the file
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 03:45:24AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
Christopher Vance wrote:
You can already mark a fd 'close on exec'.
May I suggest a different feature: the ability to mark an open file
(not just its fd) 'remove on close', with permission checked at mark
time rather than close time (t
Christopher Vance wrote:
> You can already mark a fd 'close on exec'.
>
> May I suggest a different feature: the ability to mark an open file
> (not just its fd) 'remove on close', with permission checked at mark
> time rather than close time (this status forgotten if not permitted
> when set) and
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
PID file before or after the setuid?
Two methods exists AFAIK:
1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:wheel
2 - write your PID to /var/run/myapp/my
Leo Bicknell wrote:
> Dan Langille wrote:
> > Any suggestions?
>
> Here's a slightly backwards concept.
>
> We're all familar with how you can open a file, remove it from the
> directory, and not have it "go away" until the application closes
> it. Well, extend those semantics to the namespace.
On Monday 27 October 2003 12:42 pm, Dan Langille wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Wes Peters wrote:
> > On Monday 27 October 2003 07:31 am, Dan Langille wrote:
> > > If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> > > PID file before or after the setuid?
> > >
> > > Two methods ex
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Wes Peters wrote:
> On Monday 27 October 2003 07:31 am, Dan Langille wrote:
> > If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> > PID file before or after the setuid?
> >
> > Two methods exists AFAIK:
> >
> > 1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is
On Monday 27 October 2003 07:31 am, Dan Langille wrote:
> If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> PID file before or after the setuid?
>
> Two methods exists AFAIK:
>
> 1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:wheel
> 2 - write your PID to /var/run/mya
In a message written on Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 10:31:18AM -0500, Dan Langille wrote:
> Any suggestions?
Here's a slightly backwards concept.
We're all familar with how you can open a file, remove it from the
directory, and not have it "go away" until the application closes
it. Well, extend those s
On 27 Oct 2003 at 17:39, Oliver Eikemeier wrote:
> Dan Langille wrote:
>
> > If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> > PID file before or after the setuid?
> >
> > Two methods exists AFAIK:
> >
> > 1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:wheel
>
Dan Langille wrote:
If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
PID file before or after the setuid?
Two methods exists AFAIK:
1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:wheel
2 - write your PID to /var/run/myapp/myapp.pid where /var/run/myapp/
is chow
Dixitur illum "Dan Langille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribere...
Hi,
> If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
> PID file before or after the setuid?
>
> Two methods exists AFAIK:
>
> 1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:wheel
OpenBSD seems to favo
If a process starts up and does a setuid, should it be writing the
PID file before or after the setuid?
Two methods exists AFAIK:
1 - write your PID immediately, and the file is chown root:wheel
2 - write your PID to /var/run/myapp/myapp.pid where /var/run/myapp/
is chown myapp:myapp
Of the
24 matches
Mail list logo
