It turns out that the new priority sequencing of run state transitions had a
flaw: the frontends, the analyzer and the logger all registered at priority 500
and were invoked in essentially a random order. For example the frontend could
get a begin-run transition before the logger and so start sending data before
the logger opened the output file. Same for the analyzer and same for the end of
run. Also the sequencing for pause/resume run and begin/end run was different
when the two pairs ought to have identical sequencing.

I now commited changes to mana.c and mlogger.c changing their transition sequencing:

start and resume:
200 - logger (mlogger.c, no change)
300 - analyzer (mana.c, was 500)
500 - frontends (mfe.c, no change)

stop and pause:
500 - frontends (mfe.c, no change)
700 - analyzer (mana.c, was 500)
800 - mlogger (mlogger.c, was 500)

P.S. However, even after this change, the TRIUMF ISAC/Dragon experiment still
see an anomaly in the analyzer, where it receives data events after the
end-of-run transition.

K.O.