Re: Some suggestions on old-fashioned usage with s6 2.10.x

["Laurent Bercot" <ska-supervision@skarnet.org>]

>Currently I do not understand the `s6-linux-init-shutdown(d)' way
>well, so the old-fashioned way is retained at least for now, given its
>simplicity in implementation and seemingly better flexibility.  Frankly
>it is my intuition that the new way costs more than the old way, but
>does not provide that much in return.  (Feel free to prove me wrong.)

  It may cost more *to you*, but there is real and significant value
in following existing interfaces that people are familiar with. Being
able to just use "reboot" instead of the, uh, slightly less intuitive
"s6-svscanctl -6 /run/service" to reboot your machine, is one fewer
obstacle on the way to mainstream s6 adoption.

  Additionally, and maybe more to your liking, there are also technical
benefits to never killing s6-svscan. Being able to assume that a
supervision tree will be operational at all times, including during
shutdown (and even in stage 4!), is really comfortable, it cuts down
on a lot of specialcasing, it makes shutdown procedures recoverable,
integration into various configurations easier (I'm thinking
containers with or without a catch-all logger, for instance), and
all-in-all has just less of a "screwdriver and duct tape" feel than
a bunch of execline (or rc ;)) scripts.

--
  Laurent