Re^2: Yet Another Daemonization Stub

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Yet Another Daemonization Stub by jeffa (Bishop) on Nov 15, 2004 at 13:26 UTC
You might not find your answer for #3 from any Perl documentation ... but you most certainly will from Advanced Programming in the Unix Environment by the late and great Stevens. I don't have my copy with me right now, but if my memory serves me correct, it has a wonderful recipe for daemonization which covers all the points Zaxo mentioned. UPDATE: Here. Let me hold a mirror up to you. See? You are being the troll. If you want to know more about me, you can always read some of these: http://perlmonks.com/index.pl?orderby=hr&node_id=6364&user=jeffa. Wow. I hope you learned your lesson here, shake it off, and learn how to take constructive criticism. We are here to help. Why are you here? jeffa L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L-- -R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B-- H---H---H---H---H---H--- (the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)	[reply]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re^3: Yet Another Daemonization Stub by dws (Chancellor) on Nov 16, 2004 at 07:07 UTC
Which Perl documentation that discusses this subject recommends doing that as the general case? You might find that Lincoln Stein's Network Programming with Perl is an insightful read.	[reply]
Re^3: Yet Another Daemonization Stub by meredith (Friar) on Nov 16, 2004 at 19:00 UTC
I disagree with number 2. SVR4 systems are not legacy at all. Solaris 10 was just released. I can't imagine there is really a big hit for doing a double fork, considering all non-legacy systems do copy-on-write forks anyway. Besides, can't it just be wrapped in a conditional if it were a big hit? `mhoward - at - hattmoward.org`	[reply]