Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.8.4/V2.0) id LAA02167; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 11:40:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from sierra.zyzzyva.com by taz.hyperreal.com (8.8.4/V2.0) with ESMTP id LAA02155; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 11:40:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabber.c2.net (gabber.c2.net [208.139.36.80]) by sierra.zyzzyva.com (8.8.4/8.8.2) with ESMTP id NAA12737 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 13:09:13 -0600 (CST) Received: (from sameer@localhost) by gabber.c2.net (8.8.4/8.8.4) id LAA02017; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 11:45:48 -0800 (PST) From: sameer Message-Id: <199702031945.LAA02017@gabber.c2.net> Subject: Re: [SHOWSTOPPER] SIGHUP caused a fatal and silent crash To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 11:45:47 -0800 (PST) Cc: new-httpd@hyperreal.com In-Reply-To: from Ed Korthof at "Feb 3, 97 07:33:35 am" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com > I saw this at least as early as 1.2b2; I know there have been some changes > since, but I think none which would create this behavior, since the parent > is actually waiting for each of the children (if'd it'd forgotten, things > might be fine since it'd go on with the restart procedure (of course, it > probably couldn't bind the address, so it'd probably die outright)). I've seen intermittent problems where -HUP would cause 'can't bind to port' errors. It appears that -HUP isn't killing all of the child processes. I will hopefully find some time to do some debugging on this. -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer@c2.net