← Back to branch summary

~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/karmic/rsyslog/karmic

« back to all changes in this revision

Viewing changes to runtime/wtp.c

  • Committer: Bazaar Package Importer
  • Author(s): Michael Biebl
  • Date: 2009-05-15 23:25:14 UTC
  • mfrom: (1.2.6 upstream)
  • mto: This revision was merged to the branch mainline in revision 15.
  • Revision ID: james.westby@ubuntu.com-20090515232514-gvxl1azlal0gl6zj
http://bugs.debian.org/522297
http://bugs.debian.org/519073
http://bugs.debian.org/526658
* New upstream release.
* debian/rsyslog.init
  - Pass proper return code to log_end_msg.
* debian/rsyslog.conf
  - Set $Umask to 0022 to enforce that new log files or directories are
    always created with the right permissions. Closes: #522297
* debian/patches/imudp_multiple_udp_sockets.patch
  - Fix a segfault in imudp when multiple udp listeners are configured.
    Patch cherry-picked from upstream git. Closes: #519073
* debian/patches/manpage_pidfile.patch
  - Fix rsyslogd man page to point to the correct pid file. Closes: #526658

Show diffs side-by-side

added added

removed removed

Lines of Context:
runtime/wtp.c
171
171
        DEFiRet;
172
172
 
173
173
        ISOBJ_TYPE_assert(pThis, wtp);
 
174
        d_pthread_mutex_lock(pThis->pmutUsr);
174
175
        pthread_cond_broadcast(pThis->pcondBusy);
 
176
        d_pthread_mutex_unlock(pThis->pmutUsr);
175
177
        RETiRet;
176
178
}
177
179
 
324
326
rsRetVal wtpSignalWrkrTermination(wtp_t *pThis)
325
327
{
326
328
        DEFiRet;
327
 
        /* I leave the mutex code here out as it give as deadlocks. I think it is not really
 
329
        /* I leave the mutex code here out as it gives us deadlocks. I think it is not really
328
330
         * needed and we are on the safe side. I leave this comment in if practice proves us
329
 
         * wrong. The whole thing should be removed after half a your or year if we see there
 
331
         * wrong. The whole thing should be removed after half a year or year if we see there
330
332
         * actually is no issue (or revisit it from a theoretical POV).
331
333
         * rgerhards, 2008-01-28
 
334
         * revisited 2008-09-30, still a bit unclear, leave in
332
335
         */
333
336
        /*TODO: mutex or not mutex, that's the question ;)DEFVARS_mutexProtection;*/
334
337