On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Oliver Cook wrote:
> It seemed a little odd behaviour to me... if a child isn't meant to
> reread it's configuration on a HUP then the least it could do is ignore
> a HUP rather than fail. I expect Philip has good reason for doing what he's
> doing though! :)
I am always cautious about programs trapping unexpected errors because
of bad experiences in my IBM mainframe days of programs that caught
everything and obscured/lost/overwrote the evidence of the original
problem before bombing out (sometime with a new problem). However, Exim
doesn't dump on crashes because it's a setuid program, so my instinct is
perhaps misled.
Certainly in come cases Exim does log this kind of thing (a normal kill
while reading a message is one case, I think). I will put this on my
(long) list of things to think about.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
