Peter, thanks for replying and for maintaining stunnel. > I do agree that not having a 'status' init script command is, to put it > mildly, a major nuisance, and I thank you for your work on it!
Yeah, I just finally upgraded my last couple of hold-outs to wheezy and it took two tries to build a working stunnel package for my environment (first forgot the x-forwarded-for patch, then forgot the init script patch), gah. > However, well, yeah, I guess that this shows once again that I need to > prepare and propose an update to stunnel in stable; the fact is, this > problem, previously reported as #548974 ... Ah, sorry I missed the other bug report, failed to comb through the closed ones. An updated package in stable would be swell. > So... do you think it would be possible for you to take a look at my > work on stunnel in unstable? Sure! Your patch looks good to me. And I learned what `kill -s 0` does. Bonus. :-) Depending on how literally you interpret the LSB [1], exit code 3 might be more appropriate than 1 when stunnel is not running (since the pid files aren't actually in /var/run), but this is pedantry. I'm guessing it specifies /var/run because maybe it's a violation of some other part of LSB for pid files to be elsewhere. Whatevs. Corosync is happy as long as it gets a zero for running or non-zero for anything else, so I'm content with any non-zero exit code for "it might not be running." 1. http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_3.1.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/iniscrptact.html Cheers, -C- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
