[BusyBox] another one on circular buffer syslogd
Gyepi SAM
gyepi at praxis-sw.com
Thu Jan 4 04:00:35 UTC 2001
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 08:09:53PM +0100, Michael Renzmann wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> Erm, is anyone actually reading my mails concerning that circular buffer
> syslogd? At least Gennady? There was very few response on that by now...
> :)
I have been.
> One process is the father, the rest are childs. So there seems to be a
> forking problem somewhere. Any ideas where to look at for this?
It is indeed due to forking, but it is not a problem per se: it is by
design. syslogd forks a child to handle each connection. I recall some
discussions about changing it to a non-forking version which would use
select. Someone expressed the thought that select would increase the program
size by quite a bit. I have thought about, but never had the time, to
investigate this empirically.
In any case, the solution to the 'problem' would require rewriting syslogd
to use select instead of forking. A nice project for someone with a bit of
time. I am interested, but cannot promise to do it soon.
-Gyepi
More information about the busybox
mailing list