Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Michael van Elst
r...@marples.name (Roy Marples) writes: >So I've created pidfile_lock (patch attached) to address these problems. Does it work on NFS root? -- -- Michael van Elst Internet: mlel...@serpens.de "A potential Snark may lurk in every t

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Roy Marples
On Sunday 20 March 2016 09:26:23 Michael van Elst wrote: > r...@marples.name (Roy Marples) writes: > >So I've created pidfile_lock (patch attached) to address these problems. > > Does it work on NFS root? I've not tested it especially, but I would assume so as flock(2) makes no note of it not wo

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Roy Marples
Updated patch with man page changes, including an example of it's use. Added pidfile_remove() which fixes the existing BUGS section. Added pidfile_close() so a forked process can close it safely. Made pidfile_read() visible so it's easy to obtain the PID to send a signal to. RpyIndex: include/util

Patch for bin/50460

2016-03-20 Thread Abhinav Upadhyay
Hi, Could someone please review and commit the patch in bin/50460? Let me know if it doesn't merge or if there is any issue with it. Regards Abhinav

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Roy Marples
On Sunday 20 March 2016 14:04:52 Roy Marples wrote: > Updated patch with man page changes, including an example of it's use. > Added pidfile_remove() which fixes the existing BUGS section. > Added pidfile_close() so a forked process can close it safely. > Made pidfile_read() visible so it's easy to

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Michael van Elst
r...@marples.name (Roy Marples) writes: >Saying that, I'm not really bothered about any remote lock on a remote fs, >just as long as it can lock correctly on the host. Why would you think NFS root to be not on the host? -- -- Michael van Elst Internet: mlel...@

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread James K. Lowden
On Sat, 19 Mar 2016 23:29:37 + Roy Marples wrote: > pidfile(3) is pretty crap - it just writes to the file without any > locking. I don't understand why you think any of that matters. Locks only advisory anyway. Any noncooperating process can (with sufficient privilege) overwrite the file

Re: Google summer code 2016 project ideas

2016-03-20 Thread Charles Cui
here is the link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zUd2LRm9vj-NgwLzKGcdOZ9Cd1YGpSmdBF0KLp_8Eek/edit?usp=sharing 2016-03-17 20:48 GMT-07:00 Charles Cui : > Hi Christos, > >I have uploaded my proposal, you guys should be able to see it now. > Please feel free to comment it. > > > Thanks, Char

Re: Google summer code 2016 project ideas

2016-03-20 Thread Christos Zoulas
On Mar 20, 12:02pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote: -- Subject: Re: Google summer code 2016 project ideas | here is the link: | https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zUd2LRm9vj-NgwLzKGcdOZ9Cd1YGpSmdBF0KLp_8Eek/edit?usp=sharing Thanks, I saw it. Looks good and I offered to mentor. c

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Roy Marples
On Sunday 20 March 2016 14:53:46 you wrote: > On Sat, 19 Mar 2016 23:29:37 + > > Roy Marples wrote: > > pidfile(3) is pretty crap - it just writes to the file without any > > locking. > > I don't understand why you think any of that matters. Locks only > advisory anyway. Any noncooperating

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Christos Zoulas
In article <1547312.w6y7ml9...@uberpc.marples.name>, Roy Marples wrote: There is no need for pidfile_lock(), just fix pid_file() to return pid_t. I've audited the code in the tree and the code that checks, checks for -1. The compat code below is probably wrong anyway. christos >+/* The old fun

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Roy Marples
On Sunday 20 March 2016 23:05:12 Christos Zoulas wrote: > In article <1547312.w6y7ml9...@uberpc.marples.name>, > Roy Marples wrote: > > There is no need for pidfile_lock(), just fix pid_file() to return pid_t. > I've audited the code in the tree and the code that checks, checks for -1. > The com

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Christos Zoulas
In article <21451069.kys5rkk...@uberpc.marples.name>, Roy Marples wrote: >On Sunday 20 March 2016 23:05:12 Christos Zoulas wrote: >> In article <1547312.w6y7ml9...@uberpc.marples.name>, >> Roy Marples wrote: >> >> There is no need for pidfile_lock(), just fix pid_file() to return pid_t. >> I'v

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Thor Lancelot Simon
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 08:53:03PM +, Roy Marples wrote: > On Sunday 20 March 2016 14:53:46 you wrote: > > On Sat, 19 Mar 2016 23:29:37 + > > > > Roy Marples wrote: > > > pidfile(3) is pretty crap - it just writes to the file without any > > > locking. > > > > I don't understand why you

Re: pidfile_lock(3)

2016-03-20 Thread Thor Lancelot Simon
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 08:43:31PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: > On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 08:53:03PM +, Roy Marples wrote: > > On Sunday 20 March 2016 14:53:46 you wrote: > > > On Sat, 19 Mar 2016 23:29:37 + > > > > > > Roy Marples wrote: > > > > pidfile(3) is pretty crap - it just w