From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 3 14:14:50 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 448A116A41C for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:14:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from john@quonix.net) Received: from beck.quonix.net (beck.quonix.net [146.145.66.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4BEF43D1F for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:14:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from john@quonix.net) Received: from beck.quonix.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by beck.quonix.net (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j53EEZwx030760; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:14:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (quonix@localhost) by beck.quonix.net (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) with ESMTP id j53EEZQG030757; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:14:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: beck.quonix.net: quonix owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:14:35 -0400 (EDT) From: john@quonix.net X-X-Sender: quonix@beck.quonix.net To: Vasil Dimov In-Reply-To: <20050603071323.GA69443@sinanica.bg.datamax> Message-ID: <20050603101236.V30647@beck.quonix.net> References: <13f6e3df2305b912e42aa453570a8c55@quonix.net> <20050603071323.GA69443@sinanica.bg.datamax> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SpamAssassin-3.0.3-Score: -2.642/5.8 ALL_TRUSTED,NO_REAL_NAME X-MimeDefang-2.51: beck.quonix.net X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.51 on 146.145.66.90 Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, John Von Essen Subject: Re: iftop... X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 14:14:50 -0000 Thanks. I was searching through mailing lists for iftop, and the original author did talk about forking issues, but then mentioned that he had no time to debug. I use iftop all the time, especially since many of my switches dont do bandwidth monitoring. Its a real pain killing those pids everytime! -john On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Vasil Dimov wrote: > On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 09:10:00PM -0400, John Von Essen wrote: > > Ports is listed as the maintainer for this package. > > > > I have noticed (4.10) that when you quit out of iftop (version 0.16) > > two PIDs remain in the background. If you run iftop again, another two > > PID's are left, bringing it up to four, and so on. > > > > Eventually, after the third or fourth time, you get: > > > > interface: fxp0 > > Cannot obtain hardware address on this platform > > IP address is: 146.145.66.91 > > pcap_open_live(fxp0): (no devices found) /dev/bpf4: No such file or > > directory > > > > This behavior doesn't exist on Linux or Solaris platform. Should I > > submit a PR, or contact iftop developers first and see what they have > > to say? > > > > PS - I'm not subscribed to the list, so please include my address in > > your reply. > > > > Thanks > > John > > Iftop's fork resolver is buggy. We should choose another one at > configure-time. I will take care of that port. >