From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 16 16:10:16 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2318D37B401 for ; Fri, 16 May 2003 16:10:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD46E43F93 for ; Fri, 16 May 2003 16:10:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h4GNAFUp070553 for ; Fri, 16 May 2003 16:10:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h4GNAFsM070552; Fri, 16 May 2003 16:10:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 16:10:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200305162310.h4GNAFsM070552@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Mikhail Teterin Subject: Re: ports/51759: Maintainer update: astro/setiathome (manual page fix, etc.) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Mikhail Teterin List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 23:10:16 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/51759; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Mikhail Teterin To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org, cyrille.lefevre@laposte.net Cc: Subject: Re: ports/51759: Maintainer update: astro/setiathome (manual page fix, etc.) Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 19:00:42 -0400 Cyrille! Your changes to the setiathome.sh startup-script now lead to shell errors on startup -- missing quote. I added the quote, and hit another error. I'll be sending you my update -- including the upgrade to 3.08 for FreeBSD in a separate e-mail. Please, take a look. As far as the new start-up script, I'm not sure it is worth the extra shells (per CPU) to run to automaticly restart setiathome if it exits. Even if you are convinced, such auto-restarting is desirable (I'm not), it should be one sleeping shell per machine -- not one per CPU, don't you think? My dual CPU box has four setiathome-owned processes runing instead of 3. Someone's 8-way monster will have 16 instead of 9 :-) Finally, with the amount of shell scripting required for this, may be, it would be easier to write the seti-helper in C? Yours, -mi