Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-10 Thread Stone
On 8/10/07, Udo Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Stone wrote: > > I noticed my vdr-1.5.6 did an emergency shutdown when I had poor signal > > reception during a recording, which in itself is a fine thing to do... > > but my "runvdr" script didn't seem to catch the bad exit code (exit 1) > > w

Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-10 Thread Udo Richter
Stone wrote: > I noticed my vdr-1.5.6 did an emergency shutdown when I had poor signal > reception during a recording, which in itself is a fine thing to do... > but my "runvdr" script didn't seem to catch the bad exit code (exit 1) > when vdr did that, so VDR never restarted. > > Does this ha

Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-09 Thread Stone
On 8/9/07, Udo Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Petri Helin wrote: > > Udo Richter wrote: > >> I *think* that these are kill signals received by the child process. > >> Which is strange, as the child does an exit immediately. (Unless you're > >> somewhere between 1.5.1 and 1.5.3 - this change

Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-09 Thread Udo Richter
Petri Helin wrote: > Udo Richter wrote: >> I *think* that these are kill signals received by the child process. >> Which is strange, as the child does an exit immediately. (Unless you're >> somewhere between 1.5.1 and 1.5.3 - this changed in 1.5.4) >> >> 6 is SIGABRT, 11 is SIGSEGV and 9 is SIGKI

Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-09 Thread Petri Helin
Udo Richter wrote: > Petri Helin wrote: >> Udo Richter wrote: >>> In any case, try dumping the return value to syslog, I would really like >>> to know what additional flag is set on the return value. >>> >> I got 6, 9 and 11 when I did some debugging earlier. > > I *think* that these are kill sig

Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-09 Thread Udo Richter
Petri Helin wrote: > Udo Richter wrote: >> In any case, try dumping the return value to syslog, I would really like >> to know what additional flag is set on the return value. >> > > I got 6, 9 and 11 when I did some debugging earlier. I *think* that these are kill signals received by the child

Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-08 Thread Petri Helin
Udo Richter wrote: > > In any case, try dumping the return value to syslog, I would really like > to know what additional flag is set on the return value. > I got 6, 9 and 11 when I did some debugging earlier. -Petri ___ vdr mailing list vdr@linuxt

Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-08 Thread Udo Richter
Petri Helin wrote: > It seems to me that VDR still fails writing the NextWakeupTime every now > and then, even after I made the change described earlier. Do you have > suggestions on how to shutdown properly in order to get the > NextWakeupTime written to setup.conf? I run VDR as a daemon and sh

Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-07 Thread Petri Helin
Udo Richter wrote: > Petri Helin wrote: >> I traced the problem to the SystemExec call in >> cShutdownHandler::CallShutdownCommand where Setup.NextWakeupTime is >> updated only if the SystemExec call returns 0. i changed it to accept >> all values greater or equal to 0 and now Setup.NextWakeupTi

Re: [vdr] New shutdown procedure not working as expected

2007-08-01 Thread Udo Richter
Petri Helin wrote: > I traced the problem to the SystemExec call in > cShutdownHandler::CallShutdownCommand where Setup.NextWakeupTime is > updated only if the SystemExec call returns 0. i changed it to accept > all values greater or equal to 0 and now Setup.NextWakeupTime gets > updated proper