[Mailman-Users] Error running bin/mailmanctl restart
srb at umich.edu
Thu Dec 17 21:35:42 CET 2009
--On December 17, 2009 1:21:35 PM -0600 Paul Kleeberg <paul at FPEN.ORG> wrote:
> I am ready to tear my hair out.
> Thanks to Mark, I got mailman up and running except for one minor hitch.
> In my log file I see an endless stream of:
> 12/17/09 11:56:49 AM com.apple.launchd (org.list.mailmanctl)
> Throttling respawn: Will start in 10 seconds 12/17/09 11:57:00 AM
> com.apple.launchd (org.list.mailmanctl) Throttling respawn: Will start
> in 10 seconds
> Searching the archives, I found this (The thread starts at
> > The only difference between my org.list.mailmanctl.plist and Apple's is
> > my verb *start*, as opposed to Apple's *startf*. I'm baffled by
> > *startf*, which is not supported by mailman and does nothing, either in
> > the CLI or in org.list.mailmanctl.plist.
At one point, I compared the stock mailmanctl with that from the one Apple
distributes with Mac OS X Server. The only difference was that the 'start'
stanza in main() had been cloned as a 'startf' stanza, with a couple of
relatively minor changes, primarily (if I remember correctly) to make it
not daemonize, since things run from launchd aren't allowed to daemonize.
I *think* that that's what's leading to the problem you see -- mailmanctl
daemonizes, launchd cleans it up and it respawns, eventually triggering the
For my Mailman install on Mac OS X (client, not server) I gave up on using
launchd to start Mailman at boot time, and just used an old-style
StartupItem. I did make launchd scripts for all the Mailman stuff that's
normally run out of cron; see the archives of this list for information
In short, if you want to use launchd to start Mailman at boot time, I think
that you're going to have to look at Apple's version of mailmanctl, and
make equivalent changes to the stock mailmanctl to provide a 'startf'
variant. If you do that, I urge you to try to do it in a cleaner way than
Apple's hack -- my memory is that there were so few differences that it was
a crime that they'd just duplicated the entire block of code and commented
NOTE: I was doing this comparison between the mailmanctl from Mac OS X
Server 10.5, not 10.6, so it's possible that they cleaned up their act and
did things differently. But a quick side-by-side compare of their
mailmanctl and the stock one should get you pointed in the right direction.
Steve Burling <mailto:srb at umich.edu>
University of Michigan, ICPSR Voice: +1 734 615.3779
330 Packard Street FAX: +1 734 647.8700
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-2910
More information about the Mailman-Users