Re: Making start/stop idempotent

The first part next to checkRunningPid makes sense.

But the second part crashes "squid -k check", by always returning true
if the pid file doesn't exists..

On tis, 2008-10-28 at 20:16 +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> I realised I never sent the patch without the option;
>
>
>
>
> On 12/08/2008, at 4:14 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>
> >> So, effectively just change to exit(0) in those two places?
> >>
> >
> > For the HEAD commit(s) yes. If you need it ported the option may be
> > needed
> > to keep other users going.
> >
> > Amos
> >
> >>
> >> On 12/08/2008, at 4:02 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Our management tools like processes to be idempotent; i.e., you
> >>>> should
> >>>> be able to start or stop a process any number of times without it
> >>>> throwing an error.
> >>>>
> >>>> Currently, Squid will return 1 if a squid process is already
> >>>> running
> >>>> (upon start) and when there isn't one (upon -k shutdown).
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm writing a patch to change this behaviour, and the most
> >>>> reasonable
> >>>> way to do it seems to be with a command-line option; I've somewhat
> >>>> arbitrarily chosen -p.
> >>>>
> >>>> Does this seem reasonable? If so, I'll submit a patch shortly.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I agree with Robert. The behavior change is nice. Requiring another
> >>> option
> >>> to enable/disable it is not.
> >>>
> >>> I'd personally go with just the behavior change to the HEAD trees.
> >>> Only disabling and adding the option to enable if its ported to
> >>> currently
> >>> stable releases (2.7, 3.0).
> >>>
> >>> Amos
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Mark Nottingham mnot_at_yahoo-inc.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham mnot_at_yahoo-inc.com
>
>