James Berry <jberry@macports.org> writes:
I don't see the incompatibility of those statements, but then I again I know what i meant, not necessarily what it means to others ;). The later sentence, btw, is missing a word on the end. It should read: "the pidfile keyword is likely useful only if the executable keyword is not specified." Does that help any?
Looks to me like startupitem.pidfile must be set for a deamon to be tracked whether it is executable startupitem or not.
No, daemondo will track an "executable" in an case (and it doesn't need to know where their pidfile is, generally, since it launches the code and thus knows the pid). In the case of script code (non "executable") daemondo doesn't know the pid, since it doesn't know what the script code did. In this case, it has to rely on reading a pidfile to get the process id, or else simply not know.
And the man page says startupitem.pidfile is "particularly useful" for startupitem.executable. Can you explain this?
That was either garbage to begin with, or else got messed up in creation of the man page. Off the top of my head I can't see any particular reason to use a pidfile keyword in conjunction with the executable keyword, unless it's to specify that it should delete a pidfile created by the executable, and I'm not sure that even works for that case.
Hope that helps.
It pretty well clears it all up. I was laboring under some misunderstandings. Thanks a lot. I documented it; hopefully correctly and the regen has updated it now. Let me know what you think. Not sure if you like the way I've set categories or the startupitems, but even though they are slightly contrived, I think it helps. http://geeklair.net/new_macports_guide/#reference.startupitems Mark