Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 12:53:42 +0300 From: Michael Bushkov <bushman@rsu.ru> To: pjd@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net> Subject: pidfile_check() possible function Message-ID: <43A7D4A6.6000607@rsu.ru> In-Reply-To: <20051219183137.GA1103@odin.ac.hmc.edu> References: <20051102001507.GB14638@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <20051103124027.GE29387@submonkey.net> <436A0C73.3010405@rsu.ru> <20051103140221.GF29387@submonkey.net> <43A009CB.2090800@rsu.ru> <20051219130928.GE63860@submonkey.net> <20051219135019.GF63860@submonkey.net> <43A6CC9E.6040109@rsu.ru> <20051219152505.GI63860@submonkey.net> <002c01c604c4$60ebe010$0100a8c0@jersey> <20051219183137.GA1103@odin.ac.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi! I've just had a situation, where I want to know the pid of the already running daemon, but i don't want to create the pidfile in case if there is no daemon running. Such a situation can occur if the daemon has some kind of controlling program. This program should be able to know the pid of the daemon (to send a signal, or for some logging purposes). With current pidfile API I don't see an appropriate way to do it. Pidfile_open() call can provide us with the PID. But if there is no daemon, this call will create the pidfile - and we'll have to use pidfile_remove() to do the cleanup. This behaviour doesn't seem to be appropriate. Is it possible to introduce some function to return the pid of the already running daemon or (-1), for example, if no daemon exists. Possible syntax can be: int pidfile_check(pid_t *pidptr); What do you think about that? With best regards, Michael
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43A7D4A6.6000607>