Re: s6-svscan - controlling terminal semantics and stdin use

2018-01-02 Thread Guillermo
2018-01-02 0:53 GMT-03:00 Earl Chew: > > My first observation is that when killing the cron initiated s6-svscan > process with SIGINT or SIGTERM, I see the behaviour described in the > documentation. The child s6-supervise processes are correctly > terminated, and there are no orphans. > > If

Re: s6-svscan - controlling terminal semantics and stdin use

2018-01-02 Thread Casper Ti. Vector
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 08:33:18AM -0800, Earl Chew via skaware wrote: > I do not think that my suggestion of placing the children of s6-svscan in a > separate process group from s6-svscan itself changes any of these > objectives. Each service would continue to apply its own session leader role >

Re: s6-svscan - controlling terminal semantics and stdin use

2018-01-02 Thread Earl Chew via skaware
[ Colin, Casper, thanks for your suggestions ] Laurent, we are not _certain_ there's no benefit from keeping stdin as is Yes, I think that is a reasonable argument to leave it as is.  - The supervision tree isn't supposed to have a controlling terminal Ok, I understand you're calling this

Re: s6-svscan - controlling terminal semantics and stdin use

2018-01-02 Thread Laurent Bercot
Has this scenario (ie starting s6-svscan from an interactive terminal) been considered previously? Yes. The default behaviour was chosen considering this: - The supervision tree isn't supposed to have a controlling terminal - It is more beneficial to run services as their own session

Re: s6-svscan - controlling terminal semantics and stdin use

2018-01-02 Thread Casper Ti. Vector
On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 07:53:39PM -0800, Earl Chew via skaware wrote: > If instead, I start s6-svcscan at the terminate and terminate it with ^C > (SIGINT), what I observe is that the child s6-supervise processes > terminate abruptly and their child service processes are orphaned. I > think the

Re: s6-svscan - controlling terminal semantics and stdin use

2018-01-01 Thread Colin Booth
On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 07:53:39PM -0800, Earl Chew via skaware wrote: > Thanks for the s6-* family of programs. > > I've just started using s6-svscan for some deployments. > > In one of the scenarios, I was prototyping the behaviour of s6-svscan > over a supervision tree directly at the