Description of problem: The irda initscript [/etc/rc.d/init.d/irda] needs a --quiet option to daemon() [/etc/rc.d/init.d/functions] to work properly. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 8.38-1 How reproducible: n/a Steps to Reproduce: 1. n/a 2. 3. Actual results: n/a Expected results: n/a Additional info: See my comments and patch to #168325 (filed against irda-utils) for further details. That patch is partly implemented now, but the proposed --quiet option isn't (yet), see: http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/rpms/irda-utils/devel/irda-utils-0.9.17-initscript.patch?rev=1.1&sortby=date&view=markup. (I'm cc'ing Karsten Hopp on this bug.) The attached patch applies cleanly to initscripts /initscripts-8.38-1 (current "rawhide"). Please be aware that I'm not actually running rawhide.
Created attachment 133510 [details] add --quiet option to daemon() (patch against "rawhide")
Why not just not use daemon() for this case?
Because just use daemon() (as the irda initscript does now) is confusing. To quote my first comment to bug 168325: "The problem is caused by daemon /usr/sbin/irattach ${DEVICE} ${ARGS} in start(). My analysis: irattach will fork quite quickly and the old process will exit(0) directly after forking. This has as a side effect that the initscript will always return success. All subsequent errors in daemon mode (for instance errors in [irattach/irattach.c:] start_tty()) will not be noticed by this initscript." So the present call to daemon() will always be "successful" even if (as I found out) your system isn't properly configured at all. Only after checking the irattach source I realized that one shouldn't rely on the output of the irda initscript.
Exactly - so just *don't* use daemon; then you don't need to worry about --quiet.
It's obvious (now) that I misread your first remark. Calling irattach directly should do the trick. If Karsten isn 't very attached to using daemon() in that initscript the fix is trivial. Karsten?
Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now, we will automatically close it. If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.) Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again.
This bug has been in NEEDINFO for more than 30 days since feedback was first requested. As a result we are closing it. If you can reproduce this bug in the future against a maintained Fedora version please feel free to reopen it against that version. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp