Closed todd-a-jacobs closed 1 month ago
My issue feels tangentially related so here's what I've got:
I was using foreman. It is still installed. (should I have removed it first?)
Procfile:
web: bin/rails server
css: bin/rails tailwindcss:watch
❱ gem install hivemind
Successfully installed hivemind-0.1 Parsing documentation for hivemind-0.1 Done installing documentation for hivemind after 0 seconds 1 gem installed
( I also added it to the development, test group in my Gemfile, and ran bundle install - no errors, no impact on the following outputs )
❱ hivemind
hivemind
runs the file hivemind render renders the source with
❱ hivemind Procfile
file doesn't specify a syntax
( the README does not mention anything about syntax )
( I'm on ubuntu-22.04 running ruby 3.2.4 via asdf )
@todd-a-jacobs I doubt that this issue is actual after 2 years, but you can use the -W
flag of open
. This flag makes open
wait until the requested application is closed.
@asmrtfm Hivemind doesn't have a Ruby gem. What you actually installed with gem install hivemind
is https://github.com/alehander92/hivemind
Summary
The following Procfile works properly with foreman 0.87.2, but fails to execute both processes when called with hivemind 1.1.0 as installed via Homebrew. Go reports itself as
go version go1.18.1 darwin/amd64
.Procfile
Failures from Hivemind
With
foreman start
, a PID is created for each browser process, and the relevant pages are opened in Safari. However, withhivemind ./Procfile
the first process starts correctly even though hivemind thinks it has immediately exited. The second process (coverage) never runs, and reports:This intuitively seems to be an issue with jobs that fork or share a parent process, since in actuality the YARD server (started separately by Guard in this case) continues to run, but hivemind seems to think that because
open
has exited it should not start or continue the other defined processes defined in the Procfile.If there's a work-around, or if I've misunderstood the documentation, please let me know. Otherwise, this seems like a bug for anything that might spawn background processes or have non-interdependent processes that should not fail to start or continue to run simply because another named process within the Procfile did.