From 249468b67cd352d6b7d151b4c98594546457414d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Michal Sojka Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 18:37:51 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] test/smtp-dummy: add --background option and functionality --- 0e/8d7870912fa5a255aea67aef9463550a835ab1 | 176 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 176 insertions(+) create mode 100644 0e/8d7870912fa5a255aea67aef9463550a835ab1 diff --git a/0e/8d7870912fa5a255aea67aef9463550a835ab1 b/0e/8d7870912fa5a255aea67aef9463550a835ab1 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..67c0b1d0c --- /dev/null +++ b/0e/8d7870912fa5a255aea67aef9463550a835ab1 @@ -0,0 +1,176 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 385B9431FAF + for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 09:38:04 -0700 (PDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -2.3 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=disabled +Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id OADjm0cGuJWs for ; + Thu, 20 Sep 2012 09:38:03 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from max.feld.cvut.cz (max.feld.cvut.cz [147.32.192.36]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1FEA431FAE + for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 09:38:02 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from localhost (unknown [192.168.200.4]) + by max.feld.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBE9F19F33B0; + Thu, 20 Sep 2012 18:37:57 +0200 (CEST) +X-Virus-Scanned: IMAP AMAVIS +Received: from max.feld.cvut.cz ([192.168.200.1]) + by localhost (styx.feld.cvut.cz [192.168.200.4]) (amavisd-new, + port 10044) + with ESMTP id X4nqNXQtRn0q; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 18:37:55 +0200 (CEST) +Received: from imap.feld.cvut.cz (imap.feld.cvut.cz [147.32.192.34]) + by max.feld.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE76E19F3392; + Thu, 20 Sep 2012 18:37:55 +0200 (CEST) +Received: from steelpick.2x.cz (note-sojka.felk.cvut.cz [147.32.86.30]) + (Authenticated sender: sojkam1) + by imap.feld.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BC95E660904; + Thu, 20 Sep 2012 18:37:52 +0200 (CEST) +Received: from wsh by steelpick.2x.cz with local (Exim 4.80) + (envelope-from ) + id 1TEjl9-0003E9-Ub; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 18:37:51 +0200 +From: Michal Sojka +To: Tomi Ollila , notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] test/smtp-dummy: add --background option and + functionality +In-Reply-To: <1347978182-8771-1-git-send-email-tomi.ollila@iki.fi> +References: <1347978182-8771-1-git-send-email-tomi.ollila@iki.fi> +User-Agent: Notmuch/0.14+23~g9d68aca (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.2.1 + (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) +Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 18:37:51 +0200 +Message-ID: <87zk4k4pls.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain +Cc: Tomi Ollila +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 +Precedence: list +List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." + +List-Unsubscribe: , + +List-Archive: +List-Post: +List-Help: +List-Subscribe: , + +X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 16:38:04 -0000 + +Hi Tomi, + +On Tue, Sep 18 2012, Tomi Ollila wrote: +> From: Tomi Ollila +> +> When shell executes background process using '&' the scheduling of +> that new process is arbitrary. It could be that smtp-dummy doesn't +> get execution time to listen() it's server socket until some other +> process attempts to connect() to it. The --background option in +> smtp-dummy makes it to go background *after* it started to listen +> its server socket. +> +> When --background option is used, the line "smtp_dummy_pid=''" +> is printed to stdout from where shell can eval it. +> --- +> +> This is v3 of id:"1323766883-17607-1-git-send-email-tomi.ollila@iki.fi" +> +> addressing (some) Dmitry's comments. +> +> test/smtp-dummy.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- +> 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) +> +> diff --git a/test/smtp-dummy.c b/test/smtp-dummy.c +> index 86d4316..bb13668 100644 +> --- a/test/smtp-dummy.c +> +++ b/test/smtp-dummy.c +> @@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ do_smtp_to_file (FILE *peer, FILE *output) +> int +> main (int argc, char *argv[]) +> { +> + const char * progname; +> char *output_filename; +> FILE *peer_file, *output; +> int sock, peer, err; +> @@ -126,9 +127,31 @@ main (int argc, char *argv[]) +> struct hostent *hostinfo; +> socklen_t peer_addr_len; +> int reuse; +> + int background; +> + +> + progname = argv[0]; +> + +> + background = 0; +> + for (; argc >= 2; argc--, argv++) { +> + if (argv[1][0] != '-') + +This is ugly, but all right. I do not think we need to have high +standards for this piece of code :) + +> + break; +> + if (strcmp (argv[1], "--") == 0) { +> + argc--; +> + argv++; +> + break; +> + } +> + if (strcmp (argv[1], "--background") == 0) { +> + background = 1; +> + continue; +> + } +> + fprintf(stderr, "%s: unregognized option '%s'\n", +> + progname, argv[1]); +> + return 1; +> + } +> +> if (argc != 2) { +> - fprintf (stderr, "Usage: %s \n", argv[0]); +> + fprintf (stderr, +> + "Usage: %s [--background] \n", progname); +> return 1; +> } +> +> @@ -181,6 +204,36 @@ main (int argc, char *argv[]) +> return 1; +> } +> +> + if (background) { +> + int pid = fork (); +> + if (pid > 0) { +> + printf ("smtp_dummy_pid='%d'\n", pid); +> + fflush (stdout); +> + close (sock); +> + return 0; +> + } +> + if (pid < 0) { +> + fprintf (stderr, "Error: fork() failed: %s\n", +> + strerror (errno)); +> + close (sock); +> + return 1; +> + } +> + /* Reached if pid == 0 (the child process). */ +> + /* Close stdout so that the one interested in pid value will +> + also get EOF. */ +> + close (STDOUT_FILENO); +> + /* dup2() will re-reserve fd of stdout (1) (opportunistically), +> + in case fd of stderr (2) is open. If that was not open we +> + don't care fd of stdout (1) either. */ +> + dup2 (STDERR_FILENO, STDOUT_FILENO); +> + +> + /* This process is now out of reach of shell's job control. +> + To resolve the rare but possible condition where this +> + "daemon" is started but never connected this process will +> + (only) have 30 seconds to exist. */ +> + alarm (30); + +30 seconds is probably enough. If it turns out that we need longer +timeout in some scenario, I'd suggest to call alarm() also when +something is received on the socket to extend the timeout. + +Overall, both patches LGTM. + +-Michal -- 2.26.2