Hello,
I've got a script that is periodically performing a disk / raid array
integrity check by touching a file. The touch is failing
occasionally, with an exit status of 1. If I do 'strace touch'
instead of just 'touch' the strace indicates an exit status of 0. So
I'm not sure why this is gett
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Geir Hauge wrote:
> Add ''set -x'' at the start of the function and examine the output to see if
> it actually runs touch from PATH.
The strace output is showing that the correct 'touch' is being executed.
[pid 6747] execve("/bin/touch", ["touch", "/mnt/array1/.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>> Notice that the child process pid=6747 exits with status 0
>
> Where does it say that? How are you even invoking strace here? I don't
> know how to read this output, nor do I know how to reproduce it.
[pid 6747] execve("/bin/touch", ["to
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 02:23:54PM -0600, Dallas Clement wrote:
>> [pid 6747] execve("/bin/touch", ["touch", "/mnt/array1/.accesstest"],
>> [/* 14 vars */]) = 0
>>
>> The = 0 at th
It turns out that my 'touch' command is actually getting executed, but
not when I expect it. Here is a recap of my script function which is
occasionally misbehaving:
# $1 mntpoint
fsaccesstest()
{
local RETRY_MAX=3
local RETRY_INTERVAL=3
local CHK_RESULT=1
TMP=`gr
> That makes no sense. Fix your quoting (it's atrocious) and then run
> the function with "set -x". Don't throw strace at it, at this point.
> It's really not the right tool at this level of debugging.
Okay, I simplified the script slightly, fixed the quoting and re-ran
with set -x. Here is the
>> + touch /mnt/array1/.accesstest
>> + CHK_RESULT=1
>
> It looks to me that touch is failing and reporting the failure and
> that bash is handling it correctly.
>
>> + touch /mnt/array1/.accesstest
>> + CHK_RESULT=0
>
> And then on a subsequent pass touch is reporting success.
>
> This doesn't (ye
Bob, Yes I agree with everything you've said. I am grasping at
straws, which I really don't like. It's very unlikely that the
problems are with any of these things I've mentioned bash, Linux
kernel, compiler, libc etc. This script is fairly large and it does
lots of checking of block devices, r
Hi All,
Just wanted to let you know that I have found a solution to my
problem, though I can't entirely explain it yet. As mentioned
earlier, this script was designed to run as a daemon, i.e. run in the
background. This is what I was doing to daemonize the script:
Daemon()
{
while :
