in reply to Re: Yet Another Daemonization Stub
in thread Yet Another Daemonization Stub

This node falls below the community's minimum standard of quality and will not be displayed.

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)
    
    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.

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