Re: upstart: please update to latest upstream version
Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> writes:
> On 07.03.2012 00:21, Fernando Lemos wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
>>> To give one particular example: systemd uses Linux-specific features to
>>> accurately track all the processes started by a service, which allows
>>> accurate monitoring and shutdown of processes which could otherwise
>>> disassociate themselves from their parent processes via the usual
>>> daemonizing trick. POSIX doesn't provide features that allow this in
>>> general, but Linux does. (Quite possibly other OSes provide those
>>> features too, but not in a standardized way.)
>>
>> By the way, upstart uses ptrace for this:
>>
>> http://netsplit.com/2007/12/07/how-to-and-why-supervise-forking-processes/
>>
>> It's an interesting trick, and probably more portable too.
>
> It's an ugly hack, even Scott didn't like that approach very much and
> definitely one of the weaker points of upstart. Scott was planing on
> reworking process tracking using a netlink based interface.
But would it be a sufficient replacement for systemd on non-linux
platforms?
Because (other than upstreams hostility which might need a "fork"
similar to openssh) that is all that is needed. Locate the essential
features systemd can't do without that are linux-only and find
sufficient replacements for them for other kernels.
In some cases it might even turn out the feature has so many benefits
that it makes sense to implement it in the other kernel too. A bunch of
stuff in the linux kernel was based on features in the bsd kernel. So
why not go the other way too?
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: