Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 2/2] build: compress kernel debuginfo using zstd

2020-05-15 Thread Paul Spooren
Could we use that for the SDK/ImageBuilder as well? Best, Paul -- May 13, 2020 9:20:39 AM Matthias Schiffer : zstd with its default settings (compression level -3) compresses better than bzip2 -9 (which is the default setting), and is an order of magnitude faster. I made the following

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH v2 1/1] firewall3: harden string functions that might overflow

2020-05-15 Thread Philip Prindeville
So that I may craft the rewrite appropriately, it would help to know what your objection to strlcpy() is. Sent from my iPhone > On May 14, 2020, at 7:24 PM, Philip Prindeville > wrote: > > What should I use instead of strlcpy or strcpy? > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On May 14, 2020, at

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Quectel RM500Q failing to get ip address assignment with netifd and modemmanager

2020-05-15 Thread Alex Ballmer
On Wed, 13 May 2020 16:33:57 -0500 Alex Ballmer wrote: > On Tue, 12 May 2020 10:41:36 +0200 > Aleksander Morgado wrote: > > > Hey, > > > > > > > > root@localhost:~# mmcli -b 2 > > > > > > General| dbus path: > > >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Ubus based service watchdog?

2020-05-15 Thread Michael Jones
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 5:56 PM Wes Turner wrote: > FWIW, k8s has Liveness, Readiness and Startup Probes > > https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/configure-liveness-readiness-startup-probes/ > :: > > > The kubelet uses startup probes to know when a container application has >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Ubus based service watchdog?

2020-05-15 Thread Michael Jones
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 9:57 AM Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On 15/05/2020 03:58, Petr Štetiar wrote: > > In other words I think, that one can solve this use case with current > > solutions, no need to bloat procd. > > And if you're going to bloat procd, it pays to look at what the >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Ubus based service watchdog?

2020-05-15 Thread Michael Jones
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 4:35 AM Petr Štetiar wrote: > Michael Jones [2020-05-15 02:39:52]: > > > What's wrong with monit is that it's documentation is gigantic > > Good documentation with a lot of examples is hardly a problem, its a bonus > point for me. > > I think you misunderstood. Monit

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Ubus based service watchdog?

2020-05-15 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On 15/05/2020 03:58, Petr Štetiar wrote: In other words I think, that one can solve this use case with current solutions, no need to bloat procd. And if you're going to bloat procd, it pays to look at what the equivalent systemd functionality provides (it has a per-service application-aware

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Ubus based service watchdog?

2020-05-15 Thread Petr Štetiar
Michael Jones [2020-05-15 02:39:52]: > What's wrong with monit is that it's documentation is gigantic Good documentation with a lot of examples is hardly a problem, its a bonus point for me. > for a relatively trivial need. Your need, your current trivial use case. Overall project

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Ubus based service watchdog?

2020-05-15 Thread Michael Jones
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 1:58 AM Petr Štetiar wrote: > Michael Jones [2020-05-13 12:48:49]: > > Hi, > > > I have a critical service on my OpenWRT system that needs monitoring and > > re-starting if it's failed. > > whats wrong with monit[1]? It was designed exactly for this purpose and is > much

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Ubus based service watchdog?

2020-05-15 Thread Petr Štetiar
Michael Jones [2020-05-13 12:48:49]: Hi, > I have a critical service on my OpenWRT system that needs monitoring and > re-starting if it's failed. whats wrong with monit[1]? It was designed exactly for this purpose and is much more flexible. > I've been looking for a mechanism in procd that