Subj : Re: Semaphore
To   : Nick Andre
From : Rob Swindell
Date : Sun Jan 17 2021 01:37 pm

 Re: Re: Semaphore
 By: Nick Andre to Rob Swindell on Sun Jan 17 2021 03:46 pm

> On 17 Jan 21  12:41:01, Rob Swindell said the following to Nick Andre:
>
>  > When your beloved Linux needs to shut down, why does it not just
>  > immediately signal the system to power off? Why does it get busy
>  > terminating services?
>
> RS> Programs can handle signals (e.g. SIGTERM) gracefully. This is pretty
> RS> stand for *nix programs and BinkD is no exception. This is what the
> RS> exitsig() function in binkd's breaksig.c already does.
>
> Yes... I already know this. Thats not what was requested here a few times
> over the years. Read my other message. Dialup/legacy/other mailers wait
> until the current session is done before exiting when receiving an exit
> semaphore.

Okay, so you're wanting a change in the behavior of the termination signal handling. That seems different than expecting the use of a file to signal the termination.

There are many standard signals and BinkD is treating 3 of them the same (SIGBREAK, SIGINT, and SIGTERM). It doesn't seem like it would be hard to change the behavior of one or all of those (or add support for another signal) to terminate in the fashion you're requesting. Without the use of a file.
--
                                           digital man

Sling Blade quote #12:
Karl (re hammer): I don't rightly know. I just kinda woke up holding it.

You are viewing proxied material from vert.synchro.net. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.