From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Feb 10 21:56:56 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7358CC68;
 Tue, 10 Feb 2015 21:56:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-yh0-x230.google.com (mail-yh0-x230.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::230])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 290B5E4E;
 Tue, 10 Feb 2015 21:56:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-yh0-f48.google.com with SMTP id t59so8888719yho.7;
 Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:56:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
 :from:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=olM/Sma/RYOSwalDimyh2SpJgC5ZRDaZdXu0fa/o6yo=;
 b=x7XOlw4i/XjEnOzMwY17RiNUdHovHAZIYFUHUiJ+MhmpCMgdH9V9z9SvW1rsYfQOvf
 mQByem2xa5JUS+OTzQCxGTZrwmxH1B/B+rYzRgWpmt98CiI9Ot719KeY5bz6SvERRuM5
 NKhSuLMoEnDu38savpiBzm2CcXb2sdUcBiqufGmqTQf2NOduDaa24JV2AHr+MBOPgdni
 daqRT1MGG5b1qIBpppNCrYIAY1mhMPD7m34kOeEpLjY0wxVEw3Zp1VXd8jwVS8QPmoQ+
 f2ZUQoDj8sixwRSjaCddcxPVqqW8zifkvhgBv77N5xe2zuRKdGYW1OD5hzSYMr1xBzx3
 cHNA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.45.106 with SMTP id o70mr2257476yhb.180.1423605415394;
 Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:56:55 -0800 (PST)
Sender: kmacybsd@gmail.com
Received: by 10.170.40.148 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:56:55 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1423603964.80968.28.camel@freebsd.org>
References: <54DA617A.4090309@wemm.org>
 <A3904FE0-2D03-4290-B29E-395E8C6F6F96@xcllnt.net>
 <4A76A371-B573-4E62-BE78-94944963FFD0@freebsd.org>
 <E36EA56E-3B9E-4C40-B984-E7BE97F0175E@freebsd.org>
 <1423603964.80968.28.camel@freebsd.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:56:55 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: CFj_qeeW-10ESfvrBrRQJIGGs2I
Message-ID: <CAHM0Q_OYrke6maUfanoJoc+c=grGgVZRH7co9noFmO2BLcwLrw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: nagios vs w/uptime
From: "K. Macy" <kmacy@freebsd.org>
To: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>, Michael Gmelin <grembo@freebsd.org>,
 Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>,
 freebsd-current Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 21:56:56 -0000

>
> I wonder if that implies that any non-normal exit from a program that
> has been xo'd will result in the loss of output that would not have been
> lost before the xo changes?  That could lead to all kinds of subtle
> failures of existing scripts and apps.

Well, so long as the app doesn't crash in a way that would bypass it
shouldn't registering that with atexit() flush any pending output?

-K