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

Re: Minimal init [was: A few observations about systemd]

Samuel Thibault writes ("Re: Minimal init [was: A few observations about systemd]"):
> Ian Jackson, le Tue 19 Jul 2011 16:18:54 +0100, a écrit :
> > I think messing around with cgroups is a ridiculous way to solve this
> > problem.  The right answer is simply to change the daemons to give
> > them an option which causes them not to fork.  Then you can just have
> > a single supervision daemon which reaps (and restarts, if desired).
> But the daemon may want to start external tools, which may double fork.
> It's a good thing to be able to catch them too.

No, I don't think so.  If these external tools double fork then they
are just wrong.  They should not double fork; instead, they should
either be supervised by the parent daemon or invoked separately by the
init system.  In either case this can be done with waitpid and does
not involve cgroups.


Reply to: