search for: sigusr

Hi Arnaud, On Wed, 22 Mar 2017, Arnaud Quette wrote: > The technique is very general and is to send SIGUSR1/SIGUSR2 to the upsd daemon.? SIGUSR1 and SIGUSR2 are events just like ONBATT and ONLINE. > The patch runs successfully on my opensuse 13.2 box, and solves my problem. In upssched.conf I now have declarations such as > > ? ?AT SIGUSR1 * CANCEL-TIMER shutdown-timer > >...

...to rsync daemon from another machine and hit ctrl-c at the client end during transfer, the rsync daemon exists (not just the connection handler process, but every rsync). I guess this is because rsync gets sigpipe signal, which is handled by sig_int, which in turn sends sigusr to the parent. I have no idea why this should be. I changed sigpipe handler to SIG_IGN, and I now get the behaviour I want: if there is a network error (such as premature socket closing) the rysnc daemon won't die, and I can reconnect to it. I didn't do this clea...

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=423 ------- Additional Comments From stevesk at pobox.com 2003-01-02 11:52 ------- regarding log() clash, shouldn't the HP libsec log() be static or renamed or ? ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

I wrote a small app that monitors a Back-UPS ES500 UPS via the uhid0 interface. I want to run the daemon with as little privs as possible. gastest# ls -l /dev/uhid0 crw-rw---- 1 root operator 122, 0 Nov 12 05:26 /dev/uhid0 gastest# Is it safe to chmod o+r /dev/uhid0 ? Or is there a better way to drop privs of the daemon yet still be able to read from the device ? All I am doing is

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10738 Summary: report --stats output when termination signal arrives Product: rsync Version: 3.0.9 Platform: x64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy:

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=423 ------- Additional Comments From djm at mindrot.org 2003-03-10 12:06 ------- The patch looks good, but the only thing that makes me wary is the use of signals for IPC. Would it not be possible to do the chauthtok call earlier? E.g. after the call to do_pam_session() in do_exec_pty()? ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You

Patch #10 allows the pop3 and imap mail processes to handle multiple clients. We know this weakens the security model but it greatly increases scalability especially when clients are idle. Here's how it works. When there are no mail processes, or none serving fewer than mail_max_connections clients, the master creates a new mail process pretty much like it does now, but with some

...ent https://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsdev/2016-July/007202.html and a set of patches : https://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsdev/2016-July/007203.html https://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsdev/2016-July/007204.html The technique is very general and is to send SIGUSR1/SIGUSR2 to the upsd daemon. SIGUSR1 and SIGUSR2 are events just like ONBATT and ONLINE. The patch runs successfully on my opensuse 13.2 box, and solves my problem. In upssched.conf I now have declarations such as AT SIGUSR1 * CANCEL-TIMER shutdown-timer Will my patches be included in NUT...

Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc2 was tagged yesterday from the release_90 branch at r368683. In the Git monorepo it's available as the llvmorg-9.0.0-rc2 tag. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc2 Binaries will be added as they become available. The tag went in roughly one week behind schedule (see "Upcoming Releases" at https://llvm.org), but

Hi everyone, 9.0.0-rc1 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r367217 (tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc1 in the Git monorepo). Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc1 Binaries will be added as they become available. Please file bug reports for any issues you find as blockers of https://llvm.org/PR42474 Release testers: please start your engines, run the

Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc5 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r371837. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc5. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc5 Binaries will be added as they become available. There is only a single change from rc4 to rc5. Once more, the hope is that this will be the last release candidate and that we can

Hi, I've just tagged LLVM 9.0.1-rc3. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries. This will be the last release candidate unless there is a major problem. I'm planning to tag the final release on Dec 19. -Tom

Hello again, 9.0.0-rc4 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r371490. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc4. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc4 Binaries will be added as they become available. There are not a lot of changes from rc3 to rc4, and there are again no open release blockers, so I'm hoping this will be the last

Hi, I've tagged the LLVM 9.0.1-rc1 release. Testers can begin testing and upload binaries. I've also updated the test-release.sh script to pull from GitHub instead of SVN, if you run into any issues with the new script, let me know. -Tom

Hi, I've just tagged the 9.0.1-final release. Testers can begin uploading binaries. -Tom

Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc3 was tagged today from the release_90 branch at r370450. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc3. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc3 Binaries will be added as they become available. There are currently no open release blockers, which means if nothing new comes up, the final release could ship soon and this is

Hi, I've tagged LLVM 9.0.1-rc2. Testers can begin testing and uploading binaries. If all goes well, this will be the last -rc. -Tom

Hello everyone, 9.0.0-rc6 was just tagged from the release_90 branch at r372100. In the Git monorepo, it's tagged as llvmorg-9.0.0-rc6. Source code and docs are available at https://prereleases.llvm.org/9.0.0/#rc6 This is the same as rc5 plus one very minor change (r371969) that still seemed good to pick up. I'm not allocating extra time for testing this one, expecting to tag