Re: Minimal init [was: A few observations about systemd]
- To: Marc Haber <mh+debian-devel@zugschlus.de>
- Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Minimal init [was: A few observations about systemd]
- From: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
- Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 19:14:31 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20024.16007.757337.635075@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
- In-reply-to: <E1QkArf-00049e-I4@swivel.zugschlus.de>
- References: <201107190117.20904.russell@coker.com.au> <877h7f1tg8.fsf@qurzaw.varnish-software.com> <20005.32880.591127.827897@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <CAE2SPAYeo0dKw1V-M3dUmBAY2NTv1gzHbK+0OPR81QoyHtnYRQ@mail.gmail.com> <87bowqgwmd.fsf_-_@trurl.pps.jussieu.fr> <CAE2SPAbAd3ZxghLm+UCb-zWXA6ZZdp8btJ=4x4ep66omp1SK=w@mail.gmail.com> <20005.41054.544675.800675@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <20110719153904.GP8064@const.famille.thibault.fr> <20005.43278.339527.491712@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <E1QkArf-00049e-I4@swivel.zugschlus.de>
Marc Haber writes ("Re: Minimal init [was: A few observations about systemd]"):
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 16:55:58 +0100, Ian Jackson
> <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> >No, I don't think so. If these external tools double fork then they
> >are just wrong.
>
> Double Forking has been the right way to do it for decades. Demanding
> >from upstreams that they change their software this fundamentally to
> cater for a new init system is as unrealistic as demanding from
> upstreams to stay around snooping for new IP addresses that came
> online after the daemon was started to cater for IPv6.
However it is very easy to patch daemons to have an option which
causes them not to fork. Most daemons /already/ have a mode in which
they don't fork, for debugging purposes.
I think we should be quite happy to carry those patches forever, for
the few upstreams who won't take them.
Ian.
Reply to: