From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general/566 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) Newsgroups: gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general Subject: Re: runsv and process groups Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:57:54 -0400 Organization: What did you have in mind? A short, blunt, human pyramid? Message-ID: References: <6575lv98.fsf@ID-23066.news.dfncis.de> <20040826204817.1893.qmail@a4750aef5ce996.315fe32.mid.smarden.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1093553894 10961 80.91.224.253 (26 Aug 2004 20:58:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:58:14 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: supervision-return-804-gcsg-supervision=m.gmane.org@list.skarnet.org Thu Aug 26 22:58:07 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from antah.skarnet.org ([212.85.147.14]) by deer.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1C0RJv-00069m-00 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:58:07 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 5755 invoked by uid 76); 26 Aug 2004 20:58:28 -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 5750 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2004 20:58:28 -0000 Original-To: supervision@list.skarnet.org In-Reply-To: <20040826204817.1893.qmail@a4750aef5ce996.315fe32.mid.smarden.org> (Gerrit Pape's message of "Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:48:13 +0000") Mail-Copies-To: nobody Mail-Followup-To: supervision@list.skarnet.org Original-Lines: 20 User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:566 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general:566 Gerrit Pape wrote: > Once setsid() is called there's no way back. But there is after setpgid(). > Hm, I'm not sure yet. What do you think about runsvdir running runsv in > a new process group, and not runsv the run script? It depends what kinds of arrangements you want to make possible. If you want to allow all processes to be in the same group, then you need an option to turn off all changing of process groups, and it doesn't matter where the change happens when it is enabled. If you want to allow one service to be in the process group with runsvdir and all the runsvs, then the change can only happen for the run script, not runsv, and the script change change its process group back to that of its parent (setpgid(0, getpgid(getppid()))), perhaps with a new chpst operation. paul