Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On tor, 2009-08-20 at 10:31 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> (2) It doesn't exit with zero for a missing executable unless
>> the request is "stop". It uses 5, which means "program is not
> Using 5 is correct, but special-casing "stop" is kind of useless.
> Every other init script I have ever seen that attempts to handle
> this, doesn't bother.
I can't see a clear case either way. I know I *have* seen scripts
which took the trouble to special-case it, but I just poked around
and found that it seems much less common than unconditionally using
"exit 5". Does anyone know of an environment where it matters?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Greg Stark||Date: 2010-03-01 15:18:14|
|Subject: Re: Re: pgsql: add EPERM to the list of return codes to expect from opening|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-03-01 15:01:09|
|Subject: Re: Re: pgsql: add EPERM to the list of return codes to expect from opening |