Brent Kennedy wrote:
Dooh
Did they fix this in 3.2.1?
No, but as Theo mentioned, using a PID file is your best bet anyway.
Daryl
Dooh
Did they fix this in 3.2.1?
-Original Message-
From: Daryl C. W. O'Shea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 5:26 PM
To: Brent Kennedy
Cc: 'SpamAssassin'
Subject: Re: Stop start issue with slackware
Brent Kennedy wrote:
> I just upgraded to 3.
On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 05:25:51PM -0400, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
> You could revert the change from r490760 or you could just stop then
> start spamd rather than HUP'ing it.
Or as it came up in the irc channel, use a pid file (see "man spamd") and then
you don't care what the process calls its
Brent Kennedy wrote:
I just upgraded to 3.2.0 from 3.1.7 and now when I send:
"killall -HUP spamd"
It just says: "spamd: no process killed"
But, when I do a ps -ef, there is a spamd and two child processes. This
worked fine in 3.1.7, so I don't know what changed in 3.2 to make it more
resista
> I just upgraded to 3.2.0 from 3.1.7 and now when I send:
> "killall -HUP spamd"
> It just says: "spamd: no process killed"
> But, when I do a ps -ef, there is a spamd and two child processes. This
> worked fine in 3.1.7, so I don't know what changed in 3.2 to make it more
> resistant to killall.
I just upgraded to 3.2.0 from 3.1.7 and now when I send:
"killall -HUP spamd"
It just says: "spamd: no process killed"
But, when I do a ps -ef, there is a spamd and two child processes. This
worked fine in 3.1.7, so I don't know what changed in 3.2 to make it more
resistant to killall.
I have
