This is a discussion on Re: Anatomy of a bug : bgpd.c 1.105 : part 2 within the mailing.openbsd.tech forums, part of the OpenBSD category; --> Erblichs wrote: > I am glad our two coding styles are different.. I wholeheartedly agree. > If you don't ...
| |||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| Erblichs wrote: > I am glad our two coding styles are different.. I wholeheartedly agree. > If you don't like my suggestion, write a memory > allocator that doesn't return unless you have > a successful return OR do what you are doing > now with this type of issue, exit... I'm pretty sure you're not in any kind of position to dictate what Henning should do with his time. > It is just to simple to exit a app when unusual > conditions occur. The difficulty is have them > stay booted and working for months to years > at a time. This is not much of a problem if you run the app properly supervised under damontools, freedt or runit (or similar). > Years ago I wondered why certain apps just > stop working, now I have a idea. I somehow > thought that people cared to have a useable > system with apps that just don't exit.. Exit != stop working. If it is you really shouldnt be administering mission-critical servers. Exits are only a problem if the app doesnt restart properly but then you're most likely dealing with problems that wouldnt have been solved by not exiting anyway. My systems are perfectly usable even though apps occasionally exits unexpectedly. > Mitchell Erblich > exiting.... Was the irony intended? --- Lars Hansson |