From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/1615 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mike Buland Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: using runit as init Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:30:09 -0700 Organization: Geek Gene Message-ID: <200801110730.09851.mike@geekgene.com> References: <200801032151.21524.list-supervision@augensalat.de> <200801101306.24837.mike@geekgene.com> <200801110858.33026.list-supervision@augensalat.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1200061940 27256 80.91.229.12 (11 Jan 2008 14:32:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 14:32:20 +0000 (UTC) To: supervision@list.skarnet.org Original-X-From: supervision-return-1850-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Fri Jan 11 15:32:41 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcsg-supervision@gmane.org Original-Received: from antah.skarnet.org ([212.85.147.14]) by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JDKw4-0006GD-Lz for gcsg-supervision@gmane.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:32:40 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 2417 invoked by uid 76); 11 Jan 2008 14:32:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: Original-Received: (qmail 2411 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2008 14:32:22 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 In-Reply-To: <200801110858.33026.list-supervision@augensalat.de> Content-Disposition: inline Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:1615 Archived-At: yes, you're completely right. I'm sorry. I do overstate and come off as a jerk sometimes, most times, maybe... I feel that your proposal is effectively hacking a good system for supervising some/most/all processes and losing all the cool extras that runit offers. Really, if what you want is supervising daemon processes, runit does it well, but the rc scripts are not compatible with that concept. They all start programs that daemonize themselves, or *shudder* fork bash and use bash to daemonize them. I really like runit, but I believe that there is no good option for allowing runit to supervise these daemons without writing runit specific (ok, daemontools could run most of them) scripts. That, or maybe using the program group hack from daemontools (I beleive chpst can do the same thing, it's burried in the docs though). The problem is the forking/daemonizing, it means that when those processes do that, you're no longer supervising them. I'm willing to try and help with a good way of doing that, but I fear there is none, sometimes these systems just aren't compatible with one another. Fortunately, I don't have one run script that's more than 4 or 5 lines, and most of that is whitespace :) Sorry --Mike On Friday 11 January 2008 12:58:32 am Bernhard Graf wrote: > Mike Buland wrote: > > It seems you simply refuse the actual point of the discussion I started: > > My goal is not to make runit like SysV init. > > My goal is to replace init by something that supervises daemon processes > in the sense of daemontools. > > The discourse is about the way to that goal. > > And of course about shortcomings in runit / other init system / the > daemontools concept as process 1 in general. This should be allowed > without making someone feel defensive.