From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 11 09:20:21 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1244616A4CE for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:20:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from pit.databus.com (p70-227.acedsl.com [66.114.70.227]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D42F643D31 for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:20:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from barney@pit.databus.com) Received: from pit.databus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pit.databus.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hBBHKHiR010718; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 12:20:17 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from barney@pit.databus.com) Received: (from barney@localhost) by pit.databus.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id hBBHKHYg010717; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 12:20:17 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from barney) Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 12:20:17 -0500 From: Barney Wolff To: Andrea Venturoli Message-ID: <20031211172017.GA9970@pit.databus.com> References: <200312111251.hBBCpIb8069100@soth.ventu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200312111251.hBBCpIb8069100@soth.ventu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.38 cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Two ISP connections X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 17:20:21 -0000 On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 01:51:20PM -0500, Andrea Venturoli wrote: > ** Reply to note from Barney Wolff Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:39:28 -0500 > > > > Things started from /usr/local/etc/rc.d get a hup signal when rc is finished > > with all the startup scripts - I think. Anyway, if you don't use nohup, > > or a more-conventional way to daemonize what you've started, it will die > > mysteriously in a very short time. I've never seen anybody else use nohup > > for this purpose but it works just fine on both 4.x and 5.x. > > Are you sure? > I never heard anything like that and I never used nohup before... > Maybe net is not the right place to discuss this, though. You're welcome to try not doing it and see how it works. If you don't like nohup, man perlfaq8 and look at the answer to "How can I fork a daemon process?" - or look it up in Stevens' Unix Network Programming. I am *not* sure that it's HUP, but my experience is that processes get something fatal quickly, and nohup prevents it. Regards, Barney -- Barney Wolff http://www.databus.com/bwresume.pdf I'm available by contract or FT, in the NYC metro area or via the 'Net.