Feature #2211
closedSignals doc
Description
It seems signals like HUP and INT aren't documented. Could they be documented?
Updated by Olaf-van-der-Spek over 14 years ago
What happens with spawned backends on SIGINT? Do they get killed? If not, won't Lighttpd lose track of them?
Updated by stbuehler over 14 years ago
- Target version changed from 1.4.28 to 1.4.29
Updated by stbuehler over 13 years ago
- Target version changed from 1.4.29 to 1.4.x
small summary:
- SIGINT:
lighty signals all backends, but does not wait for them (or signal them again if they don't die the first time)
lighty does not really loose track of them; as long as it can connect to the socket, it assumes the backend is running. when the socket goes down, it will respawn it. - SIGHUP: logfiles are reopened.
Updated by Olaf-van-der-Spek almost 11 years ago
stbuehler wrote:
lighty does not really loose track of them; as long as it can connect to the socket, it assumes the backend is running. when the socket goes down, it will respawn it.
Will it stop the backends (like it normally would) if you stop Lighttpd in that situation?
Updated by stbuehler almost 11 years ago
no; a new lighttpd instance has no reliable way of knowing the PID of the processes forked by the old instance.
Updated by gstrauss over 8 years ago
- Status changed from New to Need Feedback
SIGINT is mentioned at https://blog.lighttpd.net/articles/2005/09/02/graceful-restart/
SIGHUP is sprinkled around in multiple docs including https://redmine.lighttpd.net/projects/lighttpd/wiki/MigratingFromApache
Are you suggesting a new document about "Running lighttpd", which includes startup scripts and other operational tasks, including log rotation? That might be useful.
Documentation can always be improved, but I don't think we need a separate page just for signals.
Updated by Olaf-van-der-Spek over 8 years ago
I'm not suggesting any particular solution but I do think blogs should not be considered a primary source of documentation.
Neither should a migrating-from document.
Updated by gstrauss over 8 years ago
I agreed that the documentation can be improved, suggested one way how to address the concern raised in this ticket, and asked you what you thought. You replied in the negative, with what you didn't think was sufficient (the blog post). That was not constructive and did not address my request to clarify what you thought would be better (as opposed to what would not be better).
Would you help to focus this ticket a bit, perhaps by providing a paragraph or two of suggested text, and a suggested location in the wiki that you think might be appropriate? Did you know that you can even edit the wiki, too?
Updated by Olaf-van-der-Spek over 8 years ago
IMO knowing what's not good is good too... ;)
Yes, I think a Running Lighttpd page would be good and I'm aware the Wiki is editable, I suck at writing docs though.
Updated by gstrauss over 8 years ago
We can all improve if we try. I'm not "the best" at writing docs either. Why not post some suggested text here and we can edit together?
Updated by gstrauss over 8 years ago
- Priority changed from Normal to Low
Given the large number of open tickets, the approach I am taking is to give priority to those who are responsive and participate and try to help resolve the issues they raise or requests that they make.
Other tickets requesting features or enhancements are likely to get withdrawn "Missing Feedback"
Hint: please make more of an effort
Updated by Olaf-van-der-Spek over 8 years ago
Is that what "Missing Feedback" is for? :p
Updated by gstrauss over 8 years ago
- Status changed from Need Feedback to Missing Feedback
Updated by gstrauss over 7 years ago
- Status changed from Missing Feedback to Fixed
- Target version set to documentation
InstallFromSource has a "signals" section
and the source tree describes signals in doc/initscripts.txt
Updated by gstrauss about 3 years ago
- Target version changed from documentation to 1.4.x
- ASK QUESTIONS IN Forums set to No
Also available in: Atom