Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> There is no updated patch here, forgot to attach it?
Right, but I already committed it.
> I have no idea why the child process doesn't die directly, and we
> should probably take a look at that too.
Probably. Feel free ...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wi
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 04:57:34PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> If --exec is not to be used, I suppose this patch, which uses --startas,
> would
> be the way to go. The problem is that the ntpd child processes, which are
> not listed in the pidfile, are pretty slow to go away if you SIGTERM
If --exec is not to be used, I suppose this patch, which uses --startas, would
be the way to go. The problem is that the ntpd child processes, which are
not listed in the pidfile, are pretty slow to go away if you SIGTERM the
parent process. If that doesn't disturb anyone, this patch seems to
3 matches
Mail list logo
