[Nut-upsuser] a slight bug of upsd?
aquette.dev at gmail.com
Fri Mar 23 19:17:23 UTC 2012
2012/3/22 Andrew Min Chang <laplacezhang at 126.com>
> I found that if upsd had been running, then another "upsd" was typed. The
> upsd.pid file would be deleted and the previous upsd could not quit
> normally unless using "pkill upsd".
> The second upsd detects port conflict, and then deletes the upsd.pid. As a
> result, any further "upsd -c stop" or "upsd -c reload" would detect no
> upsd.pid and simply quit.
> I know this operation sequence is not legal and this may not be treated as
> a bug. However is it better to may be better to take a examination after
> ran as "upsd"? Or upsd is just designed to be like that?
> If it is designed to be like that, should I execute a "upsd -c stop" every
> time before "upsd"?
this is a long standing issue, for which I've a patch stagging for... a
for the sake of completion, note that the same is true for upsmon too, but
not for drivers.
I've just completed and committed this to the trunk (r3506):
thanks for popping it up.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Nut-upsuser