[Nut-upsuser] a slight bug of upsd?

[Arnaud Quette]

2012/3/22 Andrew Min Chang <laplacezhang at 126.com>

>  Hi!
>

Hi Andrew


> 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
long time.
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):
http://trac.networkupstools.org/projects/nut/changeset/3506

thanks for popping it up.

cheers,
Arnaud
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsuser/attachments/20120323/5235a972/attachment.html>