On Thu, 2010-08-19 at 06:59 -0400, Mike Strickland wrote:
>
> Since there shouldn't be more than one instance of RKH running at any
> given time, I guess it's fine to leave the setting remmed and use the no
> lock file default.
> 
Yes absolutely. The default was set to not use locking in order to
preserve compatibility with past versions of RKH. However, for some
people, me included, I ran into problems when running RKH automatically
via cron, and from the command-line at the same time (in my case for
testing purposes). Not only could it mess up some tests, but it made a
real mess of the log file! As such some form of simple locking made
sense.

I should add that if RKH is waiting on the lock, then it is safe to
break into RKH at that point. It has not started any tests or written
anything to the log file whilst it is waiting for the lock. RKH will say
if it is waiting for the lock, and show a count of the number of seconds
in increments of 10 seconds. It will wait a maximum of 300 seconds (5
mins), but that is configurable. After that time it gives up.




John.

-- 
John Horne, University of Plymouth, UK
Tel: +44 (0)1752 587287    Fax: +44 (0)1752 587001


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by 

Make an app they can't live without
Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
Rkhunter-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rkhunter-users

Reply via email to