On Fri, 18 May 2012 08:56:03 +0100 Kevin Chadwick <[email protected]> wrote:
> What's wrong with init respawn or supervise and/or monit? sysvinit: - adding/removing/stopping a service requires editing inittab or ad-hoc solutions - no integrated logging - no dependency tracking system monit: - depends on external systems like OpenRC => might fail to restart a service due to possible bugs in its complicated init script - separate configuration files => more work to write them and keep in sync with OpenRC configuration - does pid file inspection and periodic signalling instead of wait(2) => racy: might fail to restart a crashed service if its pid file contains a pid of some running but unrelated process - requires extra configuration not to restart a service when it was temporarily shut down by administrator supervise (daemontools) is like runit. There's nothing wrong with it, yet it has some limitations that minit was designed to overcome: http://www.fefe.de/minit/minit-linux-kongress2004.pdf
pgpaJm3x0F1xj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
