Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 15:18:18 +1000 From: Stephen McKay <syssgm@dtir.qld.gov.au> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Cc: syssgm@dtir.qld.gov.au Subject: Re: process monitoring tool (like SysV init)? Message-ID: <199705220518.PAA07067@ogre.dtir.qld.gov.au> In-Reply-To: <19970521203745.EU46231@uriah.heep.sax.de> from J Wunsch at "Wed, 21 May 1997 18:37:45 %2B0000" References: <9705210854.AA02911@poveri.tekla.fi> <19970521203745.EU46231@uriah.heep.sax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, 21st May 1997, J Wunsch wrote: >As Sakari Jalovaara wrote: > >> It struck me as a rather nice idea. No more "ps | grep sendmail ... >> kill ... sendmail -bd -q1h" - just do "nanny restart sendmail". > >All `conforming' daemons leave their PID in /var/run/<name>.pid. /var/run/* is good, but not foolproof. A daemon could die and not remove its pid file. An innocent bystander could be shot. A nanny program (assuming it doesn't die :-0 ) would know immediately if one of its children exited. I like the idea of a nanny type program, but can't decide whether it should be merged with init, much like System V, or kept separate like inetd. Stephen.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705220518.PAA07067>