From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/1383 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Daniel Clark" Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: How to kill runsv, no matter what? Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 12:46:42 -0500 Message-ID: <5422d5e60702230946w2a69034exa0848c8c5163a7ad@mail.gmail.com> References: <5422d5e60702211214q7ecaf23co838e9ff1b9be32de@mail.gmail.com> <5422d5e60702211304g5051747aoad3dd893abaf0b16@mail.gmail.com> <5422d5e60702221951h1abb7e60l77717192900a63a8@mail.gmail.com> <20070223140504.17459.qmail@3f646761ee1f68.315fe32.mid.smarden.org> <5422d5e60702230932q609f8ea8n76a3856c8b6cb3cc@mail.gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1172252818 18669 80.91.229.12 (23 Feb 2007 17:46:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:46:58 +0000 (UTC) To: supervision@list.skarnet.org Original-X-From: supervision-return-1619-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Fri Feb 23 18:46:45 2007 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 1HKeVI-0004Ih-If for gcsg-supervision@gmane.org; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:46:44 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 17801 invoked by uid 76); 23 Feb 2007 17:47:06 -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 17796 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2007 17:47:06 -0000 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=Nx//a+79gfTghqXG+CF7VFC9aNyPNLhe4lQcKc2lDaXkNrT/H02LWwwniHrI0g43Yz38kFEkbRoj02j3XhD0g6/auAipvl4Jm02yeeBcG3h4oIYpi4neve2n0BPNRLn31uazbwhYHlfUOynZ4em9vkm5rrv7Ay3lybvO4lioUgY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=RpAIFzPTMOdIFTauhfmH+oVdjJ5D+WJPeIB70hWmWK96dzX68Bol8BPJolKP2FLZc/3Fi9vBqAYAix49tyYCg0uaBASTCCzCD4U3cx0jJA7YPz2oE7Txt18holTazz71fHlOoi7Y9oYFL2Vsyu6spRhBl0vsbM4DCb71xVZUHwI= Original-Sender: djbclark@gmail.com In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline X-Google-Sender-Auth: cfddc538bcebc974 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:1383 Archived-At: On 2/23/07, Paul Jarc wrote: > "Daniel Clark" wrote: > > I can't really control if those processes start child processes in > > many cases > > It's fine if they start child processes, but if they don't clean up > their children when exiting, that's a bug in those services. I don't know enough about services to know if that is correct - Alex seems to have a counterexample - but the original daemontools seems to work with services with this "bug", and both daemontools and (I think) runit have a suite of tools to hack around issues with services that aren't designed to work with the supervision model of service control (e.g. the thing that forces processes to stay in the foreground). Actually, perhaps that would be the best way to deal with this - some small binary that can be used instead of exec in "run" scripts that has the property of killing all of its child processes when it dies - would something like that be feasible? -- Daniel Clark # http://dclark.us # http://opensysadmin.com