On 06/02/2007 01:44 AM, jim@apache.org wrote:
> Author: jim
> Date: Fri Jun 1 16:44:36 2007
> New Revision: 543667
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=543667
> Log:
> Minor nit... be consistent and unset even now :)
>
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/mpmt_os2/mpmt_os2.c
>
> Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/mpmt_os2/mpmt_os2.c
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/mpmt_os2/mpmt_os2.c?view=diff&rev=543667&r1=543666&r2=543667
> ==============================================================================
> --- httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/mpmt_os2/mpmt_os2.c (original)
> +++ httpd/httpd/branches/httpd-pid-table/server/mpm/mpmt_os2/mpmt_os2.c Fri Jun 1 16:44:36
2007
> @@ -337,6 +337,7 @@
> pid = ap_scoreboard_image->parent[n].pid;
> if (ap_in_pid_table(pid)) {
> kill(pid, is_graceful ? SIGHUP : SIGTERM);
> + ap_unset_pid_table(pid);
Good catch. But is this also correct in the graceful / SIGHUP case?
Couldn't it happen that we want to sent a SIGTERM later?
Regards
Rüdiger
|