On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Steve Litt <sl...@troubleshooters.com> wrote: > On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 09:45:30 +0900 > Joel Rees <joel.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
I assume you mean >[...] >> Do we use a streamlined init, forcing interprocess communication to be >> well-defined and explicit? >>[...] > Check this out: > > http://code.dogmap.org/svscan-1/ > > This guy's actually done it and gotten it running. My initial reaction was, done what? But if you're saying what I think you're saying, this looks pretty cool. It'll take me some time to check that what he's saying matches what he's doing, and to figure out what parts of systemd daemontools replaces, but this could definitely be proof of concept for those who see. How does daemontools tell when to take dependent daemons down and restart dependent daemons? (The former is not something that should be done, but systemd claims it as a feature. Getting started back up, systemd does that one wrong, too (not the job of the pid 1 daemon), but it's also not a straightforward task without some help from the system. I assume daemontools doesn't play games with altering the semantics of file system permissions and any of that other stuff that systemd chooses to do because the developers refuse to understand he math of permissions? (systemd devs are not alone, of course, witness SELinux and ACLs. Except that no one seems to be doing this one right other than a few sysadmins who do it by hand. There's another bit of code there I will probably end up having to write myself, at this rate. Been trying to make time for it for the last five years or so.) -- Joel Rees Be careful where you see conspiracy. Look first in your own heart, and ask yourself if you are not your own worst enemy. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caar43inn4_tpzyrnra4am8ufg_mqhjtsudbntxaqo3z6cvr...@mail.gmail.com
