On 14/08/2015 01:25, Colin Booth wrote:
I'm not sure how I feel about having the indestructibility guarantee
residing in a service that isn't the root of the supervision tree. I
haven't done much with s6-fdholderd but unless there's some extra
magic going on in s6rc-fdholderd, if it goes down it
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Laurent Bercot ska-skaw...@skarnet.org wrote:
Oh, and btw, I'll have to change s6-rc-init and go back to the
the directory must not exist model, and you won't be able to
use a tmpfs as live directory - you'll have to use a subdirectory
of your tmpfs.
Ah
Oh, and btw, I'll have to change s6-rc-init and go back to the
the directory must not exist model, and you won't be able to
use a tmpfs as live directory - you'll have to use a subdirectory
of your tmpfs.
The reason: as it is now, it's too hard to handle all the failure
cases when updating
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Laurent Bercot ska-skaw...@skarnet.org wrote:
Eh... keep a backup of your current source, if you're using it in
a half-serious environment. The current version uses automatically
generated services, and the scripts haven't been tested yet, it's
the first
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Laurent Bercot
ska-skaw...@skarnet.org wrote:
You like to play with fire. :)
Until it's released, it's not production-ready by any means.
Just making sure you're very much aware of that.
It's how I roll. Plus the backout path to a functional system takes a
On 13/08/2015 18:05, Laurent Bercot wrote:
If you're going to pull from git head, then you should pull from
the git head of *every* project, including dependencies. Which you
didn't for execline. :)
I'm not lying! I'm just chronologically challenged sometimes. See,
if you had pulled from
