(Sorry, 2nd copy here because I missed up the change of To field in the previous one.)
cameron writes ("Re: Bug#733452: init system daemon readiness protocol"): > I was curious: why should SOCK_STREAM be used instead of SOCK_DGRAM in > your proposed protocol? SOCK_DGRAM sockets do not offer reliable delivery (at least, not on all unices). > Have you seen Lennart Poettering's pastebin of a short daemon side > implementation of that protocol: http://fpaste.org/64821/32737713/? It > meets all your desired criteria, it is used in one init system already, > and it is very extensible. Now that you know that systemd does not > actually use SOCK_SEQPACKET, but SOCK_DGRAM, do you have any changes in > opinion of the systemd approach? I still think it would be simpler to pass the ready-connected socket (or whatever) to the daemon by inheritance, rather than having the daemon call socket() etc. Do you know why in systemd it was done the way it was ? Thanks, Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/21185.44921.223653.273...@chiark.greenend.org.uk