Is there an advantage to allowing multiple copies of the daemon to run, instead of having it do one of the following:

- Either kill previous instance(s) of the daemon and replace it with a new running instance, or
- Abort the start of the new instance when a previous running instance is detected?


On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
Dear Mike,


as always, thank you for your fast response!


Am Sonntag, den 26.08.2012, 21:31 +0200 schrieb Mike Gabriel:

> On So 26 Aug 2012 15:15:40 CEST Paul Menzel wrote:
>
> > Dear X2Go folks,
> >
> >
> > while looking into sessions which are still active on the server after
> > the client was suspended and could not reconnect after resume, I noticed
> > that `/usr/sbin/x2gocleansessions` seems to not properly exit. It is
> > somehow run in background and does not exit.
> >
> >         $ /usr/sbin/x2gocleansessions --help
> >         $ echo $?
> >         0
> >         $ /usr/sbin/x2gocleansessions --version
> >         $ echo $?
> >         0
> >
> > They are still listed by `ps aux | grep x2go`.
>
> X2Go clean sessions script is a daemon script. It should be possible
> to execute multiple instances, but it should fork into background.
> There is no --help and --version available, so these optioned commands
> will just start another instance of the daemon.

Interesting, thank you for the explanation.

Is there an advantage over letting the user to decide to start in the
foreground or in the background by using the ampersand »&«?


Thanks,

Paul

_______________________________________________
X2Go-Dev mailing list
X2Go-Dev@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/x2go-dev