[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Dependecies
From: |
Rory Toma |
Subject: |
Re: Dependecies |
Date: |
20 Sep 2002 15:22:56 -0700 |
On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 15:16, Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
> Rory Toma <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > I believe that this is more flexible, takes advantage of things monit
> > already does, and adds the least amount of code and complexity to the
> > existing code. (I.e. I spent some amount of time figuring out how to get
> > this in with the least amount of code)
>
> That was some very good arguments :-) One request though, if not
> implemented, could you do: 'depend b c' as well?
Version 2.
However, the way things work:
check a
depend c
depend b
will create a Dependant_T object c and then object b. When I walk the
list, (I used the d->next idea) it will run thru them in reverse order.
So, it's sort of implemented, and I can formally clean it up after I get
this in and working.
--
Rory Toma address@hidden
VP of Run Level 5 http://www.trs80.net
Digeo Digital http://www.digeo.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- monit spawn.c, Jan-Henrik Haukeland, 2002/09/06
- monit spawn.c, Jan-Henrik Haukeland, 2002/09/12
- Potential FreeBSD bug, rory, 2002/09/13
- Re: Potential FreeBSD bug, Jan-Henrik Haukeland, 2002/09/13
- Dependecies, Rory Toma, 2002/09/20
- Re: Dependecies, Jan-Henrik Haukeland, 2002/09/20
- Re: Dependecies, Rory Toma, 2002/09/20
- Re: Dependecies, Jan-Henrik Haukeland, 2002/09/20
- Re: Dependecies,
Rory Toma <=
- Re: Dependecies, Jan-Henrik Haukeland, 2002/09/20
- Re: Dependecies, Rory Toma, 2002/09/20
- Re: Dependecies, Rory Toma, 2002/09/20
- Re: Dependecies, Jan-Henrik Haukeland, 2002/09/21
- Re: Dependecies, Rory Toma, 2002/09/20
- Re: Dependecies, Jan-Henrik Haukeland, 2002/09/21
- Re: Dependecies, Rory Toma, 2002/09/20
- Re: Dependecies, Rory Toma, 2002/09/20