[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#727708: upstart proposed policy in Debian [and 1 more messages]



Andreas Barth <aba@ayous.org> writes:
> * Ian Jackson (ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk) [131221 00:33]:

>> Also relevant is the response from systemd upstream to the request to
>> support this protocol as an option.  I found it unsatisfactory.

> You mean #732157 / https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833105 ?

Lennart here manages to put into words several of the things that I
thought when I first heard about this method and didn't express as well:

    SIGSTOP is a mechanism for stopping processes, not for notifying
    service readiness. We shouldn't attempt to overload OS functionality
    like this, as SIGSTOP might happen for it's real purpose too.

    [...]

    Another big problem with raise(SIGSTOP) is that if done on an init
    system that can't handle it will result in a freeze. OTOH sd_notify()
    handles this gracefully and just becomes a NOP.

I basically agree with his response here.  If I were him, I probably would
have added support for it anyway just on the grounds of supporting a
mechanism that's already widely used in a major Linux distribution, but I
understand his reluctance and, had I added it, I would have marked it as
discouraged and documented why.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


Reply to: