On 17/02/2014 8:34 p.m., Francesco Chemolli wrote:
>
> On 17 Feb 2014, at 08:03, Amos Jeffries <squid3_at_treenet.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> On 15/02/2014 6:47 a.m., Francesco Chemolli wrote:
>>>
>>> On 14 Feb 2014, at 13:24, Amos Jeffries <squid3_at_treenet.co.nz> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just to kick this further along. I've put together the proposal in patch
>>>> form.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone game to test the SMP support is working properly with "-M
>>>> foreground" when this is applied?
>>>>
>>>> I'm also beginning to think we are needing to add getopts_long() support
>>>> and just use "--foreground" for the no-daemon mode.
>>>> If the attached patch actually works regardign SMP and we agree on the
>>>> user-visible bit I'm happy to add that update for the command line and
>>>> commit.
>>>
>>> I'd also add an option to keep the current -N behaviour, such as uniproc, single-proc, one-process or something similar.
>>> What do you think?
>>
>> With the proposed patch -N is still working as before. But with an added
>> deprecation notice to encourage all those who just want foreground
>> semantics without the debug limits to use the new way.
>
> .. but if it's deprecated, what will it be eventually replaced with? The no-fork behaviour may be still desirable for some activities, such as debugging.
>
A combination of some specific debug option(s) to be decided in the
debug thread, and the forground/background option here.
Most of the uses though are not for debugging but only for causing the
foreground behaviour.
Amos
Received on Mon Feb 17 2014 - 08:38:42 MST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Feb 17 2014 - 12:00:13 MST