Re: preparing for release? - example correction

[Martin Pala]

address@hidden wrote:

> > > -------8<--------
> > > check apache with pidfile /usr/local/apache/logs/httpd.pid
> > > depend sybase
> > >
> > > check sybase with pidfile /var/run/sybase.pid
> > > depend apache
> > > -------8<--------
> > >      
> > I'm sorry there's the right form i wanted to ask about:
> >
> > -------8<--------
> > check apache with pidfile /usr/local/apache/logs/httpd.pid
> > depend sybase
> >
> > check sybase with pidfile /var/run/sybase.pid
> > -------8<--------
> >    
>
> I realized the other reason why I went this way as well. It's going to be
> the case that multiple processes depend directly on one process, but not
> the case where one process depends directly on multiple processes (if it
> really does, chain them, if you can't chain them, you have a race
> condition)
Yeah, your argues are good and it makes sense to use your present 
version (it needs at least fewer statements in the case that there are 
more processes dependant on one process as you described), so we should 
maybe stay with it as it is. Only one thing still resides in my head - 
at first sight i present 'depend name' statement as 'depend on name' (it 
is the cause why i asked it for). English is not my native language so 
maybe to the other people it makes no problem. In the case that it can 
cause mistake on first use for other people too, we shall maybe change 
the dictionary to be more transparent. What about it?

Martin