Re: Minimal init [was: A few observations about systemd]
On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:45:51 -0700
Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
[...]
> There's also the matter that if your daemon is being run in the
> foreground, other services depend on it, and you're not using socket
> activation, there's ambiguity as to when the service is actually
> "started". A racy startup is a bad thing.
Doesn't exactly the same problem exist with "classic" daemons?
I mean, as soon as a daemon being started forked once, the parent
instance has no idea whether the forked instance actually managed to
complete initialization, and if it did then when. Unless some sort of
communication channel is used.
Reply to: