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.