Hello all, Reading the man entry for launchd.plist I read this: StartInterval <integer> This optional key causes the job to be started every N seconds. If the system is asleep, the job will be started the next time the computer wakes up. If multiple intervals transpire before the computer is woken, those events will be coalesced into one event upon wake from sleep. Which, if I may suggest so, could be improved to be less ambiguous. Specifically, this does not tell the reader if the job will be started every N seconds, if it is already running or not. Through experimentation I was able to discover that if the job is presently running when the interval expires, no new job will be initiated, and no queuing effect will occur either. This happens to be the behavior / I/ wanted for my purposes, but the documentation is not clear on this matter and there is no mention of a way to allow spawning of multiple jobs should the intervals overlap, etc. Also: LimitLoadToSessionType <string> This configuration file only applies to sessions of the type specified. This key is used in concert with the -S flag to launchctl. Again, through experimentation, I found that the presence of this key would cause launchctl to "not find" the job described in the plist unless the -S flag was specified, which one might consider implied by the documentation, however there is no mention of the treatment of jobs configured with this key on startup. Will it be loaded, or will it be "not found" until some config is changed? Thanks for listening, Levi
On 3/4/08 5:36 PM, "Levi Brown" <levi@grokers.net> wrote:
Hello all,
Reading the man entry for launchd.plist I read this:
StartInterval <integer> This optional key causes the job to be started every N seconds. If the system is asleep, the job will be started the next time the computer wakes up. If multiple intervals transpire before the computer is woken, those events will be coalesced into one event upon wake from sleep.
Which, if I may suggest so, could be improved to be less ambiguous. Specifically, this does not tell the reader if the job will be started every N seconds, if it is already running or not. Through experimentation I was able to discover that if the job is presently running when the interval expires, no new job will be initiated, and no queuing effect will occur either. This happens to be the behavior / I/ wanted for my purposes, but the documentation is not clear on this matter and there is no mention of a way to allow spawning of multiple jobs should the intervals overlap, etc.
I second this. I was trying to find the answer to this and ended up testing it myself, after scouring the net and list archives with no answers. Geoff Franks Sr. Systems Administrator Hauptman Woodward Institute
On Mar 4, 2008, at 15:46, Geoff Franks wrote:
On 3/4/08 5:36 PM, "Levi Brown" <levi@grokers.net> wrote:
Hello all,
Reading the man entry for launchd.plist I read this:
StartInterval <integer> This optional key causes the job to be started every N seconds. If the system is asleep, the job will be started the next time the computer wakes up. If multiple intervals transpire before the computer is woken, those events will be coalesced into one event upon wake from sleep.
Which, if I may suggest so, could be improved to be less ambiguous. Specifically, this does not tell the reader if the job will be started every N seconds, if it is already running or not. Through experimentation I was able to discover that if the job is presently running when the interval expires, no new job will be initiated, and no queuing effect will occur either. This happens to be the behavior / I/ wanted for my purposes, but the documentation is not clear on this matter and there is no mention of a way to allow spawning of multiple jobs should the intervals overlap, etc.
I second this. I was trying to find the answer to this and ended up testing it myself, after scouring the net and list archives with no answers.
Geoff Franks Sr. Systems Administrator Hauptman Woodward Institute
Hi Geoff, I've filed a ticket against this, if you'd like to comment within the ticket system: Ticket URL: <http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/launchd/ticket/4> Cheers, Levi
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Levi Brown <levi@grokers.net> wrote:
Thanks for listening,
Report issues to Apple directly if you want to make sure the know about them. Note the feedback block at the bottom of the following page... <http://developer.apple.com/DOCUMENTATION/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man5/launchd.plist.5.html> ...or report a bug... <http://developer.apple.com/bugreporter/> -Shawn
Hi Shawn, That brings up an interesting point... I'm subscribed to the macosforge launchd-dev list, as are you. Wouldn't that imply bugs should be filed through macosforge? http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/launchd/report Levi On Mar 4, 2008, at 15:55, Shawn Erickson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Levi Brown <levi@grokers.net> wrote:
Thanks for listening,
Report issues to Apple directly if you want to make sure the know about them.
Note the feedback block at the bottom of the following page...
<http://developer.apple.com/DOCUMENTATION/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man5/laun...
...or report a bug...
<http://developer.apple.com/bugreporter/>
-Shawn
participants (3)
-
Geoff Franks
-
Levi Brown
-
Shawn Erickson