RE: [Wrapper-user] wrapper as daemon on un*x

[Rajiv S. <wo...@ya...>]

Hi,
   From what i see, when bash exits, it re-assigns all backgrounded processes
as children of init. The behaviour of sh, (and maybe all other pre-bash shells)
is to send SIGHUP to all its children, backgrounded or not.. Also, this seems
to happen only on solaris (aix, maybe), since on (most) linuxii, sh is merely a
symlink to bash.
   Lief, I'm able to see the java processes' output in the log file using
daemon mode. I think the stdout and stderr of the java process are being
re-assigned.. 
I have another question: All the code regarding writing PID files is surrounded
by #ifdef SOLARIS... I would like to use the PID file mechanism on linux too,
instead of pidof (Just because i want to use the same bourne sh script with
minimum differences between solaris and linux implementations). Is it possible
to open up that code for both solaris and linux? Thanks!

Regards,
Rajiv

--- "Pritchard, Sean" <SP1...@te...> wrote:
> I am using Solaris 9 and did an explicit test to confirm I was not seeing
> Rajiv's reported behavior yesterday.  I am not seeing it, but then again, I
> am using bash as my shell and his note said it only occurs when you use sh
> as your shell.
> 
> Sean
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Mortenson [mailto:le...@ta...]
> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 12:20 PM
> To: wra...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Wrapper-user] wrapper as daemon on un*x
> 
> 
> Rajiv,
> Thanks for this patch. But I have some questions.
> 
> I have not had access to a Solaris machine for a while so I can not
> verify the
> behavior now. On Linux, it appears to work if I telnet to the box, start
> an app
> and then log off. The wrapper process will still be running when I come
> back at
> a later date. Maybe this is just a Solaris issue? I am surprised that no
> other
> users have ever said anything about this before.
> 
> Any solaris users out there have any comments on this?
> 
> I have no problem adding this feature. Especially since it is all
> implemented. :-)
> I am just curious as to why others have not run into this. Or if they
> have, how
> they have been working around it.
> 
> Also a question. With this patch. Are you still able to capture stdout
> and stderr
> output from the Java process and log them to the file. It looks like wrapper
> console output is being thrown away. Which is fine for a daemon process.
> 
> Cheers,
> Leif
> 

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com