From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/2310 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Laurent Bercot" Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: Compatibilities between runit and s6 (re: Incompatibilities between runit and s6?) Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 18:55:16 +0000 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: "Laurent Bercot" NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1515869604 29137 195.159.176.226 (13 Jan 2018 18:53:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 18:53:24 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: eM_Client/7.1.31849.0 To: "Supervision Mailing List" Original-X-From: supervision-return-1901-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Sat Jan 13 19:53:19 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcsg-supervision@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from alyss.skarnet.org ([95.142.172.232]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eaQva-0006wF-7Y for gcsg-supervision@m.gmane.org; Sat, 13 Jan 2018 19:53:14 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 13359 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jan 2018 18:55:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact supervision-help@list.skarnet.org; run by ezmlm Original-Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 13352 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2018 18:55:44 -0000 In-Reply-To: X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtuddrleeggdduvddvucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecupfgfoffgtffkveetuefngfdpqfgfvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhhrfgggtgfgsehtqhertddtreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfnfgruhhrvghnthcuuegvrhgtohhtfdcuoehskhgrqdhsuhhpvghrvhhishhiohhnsehskhgrrhhnvghtrdhorhhgqeenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:2310 Archived-At: >I've started thinking that I wouldn't need to abandon use of 'sv'. With >both runit and s6 installed, and a supervision tree of s6-svscan and >s6-supervise processes, I suspect that 'sv t ...' would still work. 'sv >status ...' on the other hand might not. I would need to study the=20 >control >fifo protocol and status file layout to be sure. sv status will not work, because the status file has a different format in s6 and in runit. sv t and others? It may work; it may not. If you try this, it's on you: the interface between s6-svc and s6-supervise is not public and is not guaranteed stable. Generally speaking, using the tools of one supervision suite on another one isn't something I think is worth spending effort on. -- Laurent