Hey all,
I've reconfigured one of my debian systems to boot with s6-init/s6-rc
and while trying to debug a timing issue that I think was my own fault
(my all services bundle didn't contain my ersatz single-user
bundle). That mucked up a bunch of timing since half of the
initialization stuff
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Colin Booth cathe...@gmail.com wrote:
By the way, I've found a maybe-bug that, if real, is pretty severe.
`s6-rc -d change all ; some stuff ; s6-rc -u change all' has caused my
s6-init + s6-rc testbed system to remove the control pipe for my pid 1
s6-svscan. I
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 2:35 AM, Laurent Bercot ska-skaw...@skarnet.org wrote:
I can't grep the word addition in my current git, either s6 or s6-rc.
Are you sure it's not a message you wrote? Can you please give me the
exact line you're running and the exact output you're getting?
Thanks,
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Laurent Bercot ska-skaw...@skarnet.org wrote:
Just don't have a notification-fd file. s6-rc will assume your daemon
is ready as soon as the run script is started. It may spam you with a
warning on high verbosity levels, but that's it. :)
Yeah, this is for the
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Laurent Bercot
ska-skaw...@skarnet.org wrote:
Oh, the protocol is complicated too. If I start to implement it,
there's no stopping, and I'll be running behind systemd every time
they add something to the protocol, which is exactly what I don't
want to do.
On 20/08/2015 16:43, Colin Booth wrote:
Yeah, this is for the special case where you have a daemon that
doesn't do readiness notification but also has a non-trivial amount of
initialization work before it starts. For most things doing the below
talked about oneshot/longrun split is best, but
On 20/08/2015 10:57, Laurent Bercot wrote:
s6-svc: warning: /run/s6/rc/scandir/s6rc-fdholder/notification-fdpost
addition of notification-fd
Looks like a missing/wrong string terminator. Thanks for the report,
I'll look for it.
I can't grep the word addition in my current git, either s6 or
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Laurent Bercot ska-skaw...@skarnet.org wrote:
In that case, yes,
if { init } if { notification } daemon is probably the best. It
represents service readiness almost correctly, if service includes
the initialization.
Cool. Not the most elegant but good to
