Re: Bug#126750: klogd should optionally be started from init(8)
On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> wrote:
> > True, true. However, sysklogd and klogd are logging daemons. They deserve
> > some special treatment IMHO.
>
> Even so, starting it from inittab is too much of a kludge. For one thing,
It is far better than anything else I can think of. Fiddling with the OOM
killer to avoid killing syslog and klog is worse, for example. Writing
something else to do what init already does, and does well is pointless,
too.
This could be done in a nice, generic way so that we have a common interface
to add stuff to inittab, sort of like update-rd.d. Then, it becomes less of
a disgusting hack.
> it means that /etc/init.d/syslogd stop will either not work, or be an
> ugly hack that fools around with inittab.
Yes, that part disgusts me. Writing a update-rc.d-like interface (or
update-inetd-like, for that matter) to do it is actually a good idea, and
probably the way to go.
> In any case, if the OOM killer has moved onto syslogd, then you've probably
> lost control of the box anyway so restarting it is pretty pointless.
Not really. Forsenics are always useful.
> > That is not always possible, and sometimes a kernel VM screwup will cause
> > it, no?
>
> Why should we set up such ugly work arounds for kernel bugs or incompetent
> admins?
I don't know, maybe because it is useful for real? And because the current
kernel VM is too incompetent at doing its job?
I agree we should not setup an ugly work-around, but we can design, write
and setup a non-ugly inittab interface, and use that.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: