From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 9 05:50:10 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: gnome@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFD4D106566C for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 05:50:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C45DE8FC20 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 05:50:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oA95o9iW054986 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 05:50:09 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id oA95o9xE054983; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 05:50:09 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 05:50:09 GMT Message-Id: <201011090550.oA95o9xE054983@freefall.freebsd.org> To: gnome@FreeBSD.org From: Joe Marcus Clarke Cc: Subject: Re: ports/151725: sysutils/hal: hald fails to start with dbus-1.4 X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Joe Marcus Clarke List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 05:50:10 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/151725; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Joe Marcus Clarke To: Andriy Gapon Cc: Kevin Oberman , gnome@freebsd.org, bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/151725: sysutils/hal: hald fails to start with dbus-1.4 Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 00:47:33 -0500 On 11/9/10 12:36 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 09/11/2010 02:14 Kevin Oberman said the following: >> I'll try this as soon as I can. I'm not too sure that it will happen as >> I think that this is somehow timing related. I suspect that the entry is >> disappearing too quickly with 1.4 in some cases but is not a problem >> with 1.2. Perhaps some optimization? >> >> I suggest this because on at least rare occasion, 1.4 did run >> successfully, not because I have any clue what was happening under the >> covers. > > I guess that I already explained this part. > The problem happened because we tried to write something (even if it's just zero > sized something) into stdin of a child process that already exited. > Sometimes the child process was quicker, sometimes the parent process was > quicker, hence the non-determinism. > Ah, I missed that. I wonder if it would be safer then to ignore SIGPIPE around the write block. Joe -- Joe Marcus Clarke FreeBSD GNOME Team :: gnome@FreeBSD.org FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome