From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/2879 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Jeff Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: runit SIGPWR support Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 16:13:39 +0100 Message-ID: <18110531581952419@sas8-7ec005b03c91.qloud-c.yandex.net> References: <20200131043919.GF12551@cathexis.xen.prgmr.com> <20200214131544.tcvmh7tqu4hu2gul@caspervector> <1f198ed8-3682-26cd-e8d5-2efc412afde2@gmx.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="57091"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: supervision Original-X-From: supervision-return-2468-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane-mx.org@list.skarnet.org Mon Feb 17 16:13:45 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcsg-supervision@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from alyss.skarnet.org ([95.142.172.232]) by ciao.gmane.io with smtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1j3i5h-000El0-Cy for gcsg-supervision@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 16:13:45 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 9116 invoked by uid 89); 17 Feb 2020 15:14:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm Original-Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Original-Received: (qmail 9109 invoked from network); 17 Feb 2020 15:14:11 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.com; s=mail; t=1581952420; bh=fq0O08iMNlyBUXJiiama12cWrKpMt0wu4hiwwI7yEE8=; h=References:Date:Message-Id:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From; b=rbipN4ZwRCVjioiAObakpq8iWvsc1c4/axVUeUzGJMCNxVeggjkOyr3H8CIKuGqqE pANVSiWgVAwU2O33LN1erGEptipm2hnSN1NgvV8+zmRh3dMr5FHyi43pO4fodJLrlk YieWHbHsW0zyI2mHaeiYuCdOEdlKuEmjiWA1/XDc= Authentication-Results: mxback18j.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.com In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Yamail [ http://yandex.ru ] 5.0 Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:2879 Archived-At: 17.02.2020, 11:00, "innerspacepilot" : > Just as a thought: You have implemented signal diversion, but limited to > known signals. Why not just pass unknown signals as numbers or something > like (S6SIG55011), so they can be diverted by user? You wouldn't have to > catalogue them. absolutely right, totally agreed. i also wondered why he refuses to add this. just catch and handle ALL possible signals, including the RT signals and leave it to the user how to react. > We need good, flexible and user-friendly init alternatives for linux. right. >>  But even if your containers were using s6, which has a well-defined >>  upstream (me) and which does not understand SIGPWR either, I would not >>  apply your patch suggestion. Why? Because SIGPWR is not standardized, >>  and s6 aims to be portable, it works ootb on other systems than Linux >>  and making it use SIGPWR would endanger that. It's the exact kind of >>  problems you haven't thought of but run into when you want to patch >>  software, and makes patching always more complex than it seems from the >>  outside. sorry Laurent, this is absolutely ridicolous. we are talking about using s6 as Linux process #1, so it should catch, handle and react to all possible signals the kernel may send to said process, there might be a good reason for it, same for any other possible platform, be it BSD or SysV unices. this is inherently unportable per se. there exists no POSIX standard describing the signals a kernel may send to notify process #1 about certain events.