[vitunes] Re: Socket stuff (was: mailling list problems ?)
- From: kilian <kilian.klimek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: vitunes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:15:08 +0100
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 08:03:57PM -0500, Ryan Flannery wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 6:54 PM, kilian <kilian.klimek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 01:54:40PM -0500, Ryan Flannery wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 5:16 AM, kilian <kilian.klimek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 01:16:42AM -0500, Ryan Flannery wrote:
> >> >> 2. If vitunes has a socket, and exits unexpectedly
> >> >> (segfault/SIGKILL/etc), the socket still exists. �Easy thoughts around
> >> >> this? � A lock/pid file perhaps?
> >> >
> >> > 2: This is already taken care of. In sock_listen, the socket file is
> >> > deleted first (because if it exists, the bind call would fail).
> >>
> >> Hmm.. it doesn't appear to be working on my end. �Steps to problem:
> >> 1. I launch vitunes in one term, and use a few "vitunes -c '...'" from
> >> the other term and the socket works fine.
> >> 2. I then "pkill -9 vitunes"
> >> 3. Then I re-launch vitunes
> >> 4. This new (second) vitunes doesn't delete/recreate the socket...
> >> that is, "vitunes -c '...'" from another term will not work on this
> >> new instance.
> >
> > ahh, yes. Can reproduce this. Apparently the problem is that the mplayer
> > process is still running and the socket leaks to the process. I must
> > have killed the mplayer process when I tested this... don't know. The
> > good news is, it should be easy to fix. Can you please test the attached
> > diff if it solves the problem?
> >
>
> Works here. Thanks. Do you want to commit/pull-request-thing-it?
Great. Yeah, just pushed it to the socket branch.
>
> -Ryan
>
Other related posts:
