Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Laurent Bercot
On 20/09/2015 05:44, Casper Ti. Vector wrote: I just read your modification on the blurb page (commit e56e1294), and found it somehow still lacking: in my experience, dependency is honoured by OpenRC even with `rc_parallel' enabled; and more than that, "readiness" (here defined as `exit 0' for a

Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Casper Ti. Vector
(Accidentally sent to Colin as private mail, reposting verbatim here; sorry for the disturbance...) Well, this naming issue is all about overloading... To circumvent the overloading problem, we can also use some other name pairs like `start'/`stop' or `begin'/`end' (Gentoo and LaTeX user here

Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Casper Ti. Vector
This paragraph should be: > The same reason explains why I think `up'/`down' are worse names: > because `up'/`down' (in longruns) and `up'/`down' (in oneshots > currently) seem much less correlated than `run'/`finish' (in longruns) > and `up'/`down' (in oneshots currently). (I must be really

Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Laurent Bercot
On 20/09/2015 10:47, Colin Booth wrote: specifically thus: ./up is what fires when the service is brought up, ./down is what fires when the service is brought down, ./run is what fires when a non-running service is supposed to be running, and ./finish is when a running service stops.

RE: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread James Powell
Well generally I hatched the idea in my head when I started looking at how OpenRC can use stacked runlevels and it made me think of the typical stage-2 script which acts as a master controller script to start the supervisor and execute everything in the service directory. Because s6 provides a

Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Laurent Bercot
On 20/09/2015 07:30, Steve Litt wrote: Yes. The use of a file called "down" to tell the system not to run the process, and also the use of a script called "down" to perform an action at the appropriate time, will be holy hell to document, even if theoretically they cannot both happen in the same

Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Colin Booth
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Casper Ti. Vector wrote: > (Accidentally sent to Colin as private mail, reposting verbatim here; > sorry for the disturbance...) > > Well, this naming issue is all about overloading... To circumvent the > overloading problem, we can also

Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Steve Litt
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:15:52 +0800 "Casper Ti. Vector" wrote: > (Accidentally sent to Colin as private mail, reposting verbatim here; > sorry for the disturbance...) > > Well, this naming issue is all about overloading... To circumvent the > overloading problem, we can

Re: Built-in ordering

2015-09-20 Thread Steve Litt
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 10:49:13 -0700 Avery Payne wrote: > Regarding the use of ordering during "stage 1", couldn't you just > have a single definition for stage 1, run through it to set up > whatever is needed, then transition to a new system state that > doesn't include

Re: Built-in ordering

2015-09-20 Thread Laurent Bercot
On 20/09/2015 18:26, Steve Litt wrote: Of course, all this could be avoided the LittKit way and just run a script depositing "down" files before running the supervisor. But the LittKit way specifically defies Laurent's proposal that PID1 be able to restart the supervisor (I think). I don't

Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Steve Litt
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 11:26:00 +0200 Laurent Bercot wrote: > On 20/09/2015 07:30, Steve Litt wrote: > > Yes. The use of a file called "down" to tell the system not to run > > the process, and also the use of a script called "down" to perform > > an action at the

Built-in ordering

2015-09-20 Thread Steve Litt
Hi all, It just occurred to me that built-in ordering could be as simple as making the very first loop, on, for want of a better word, svscanboot, search for a directory with a file called "mefirst". Upon encountering that directory, it would execute that directory's run script, which would

Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Laurent Bercot
On 20/09/2015 18:03, Steve Litt wrote: That's my point exactly. Unfamiliar with the tool, you read the docs, keep reading about "down" in two different contexts, get confused, and say "later days." You will not read about "down" in two different contexts in the docs. If you had read the docs,

Re: Some suggestions about s6 and s6-rc

2015-09-20 Thread Jonathan de Boyne Pollard
Colin Booth: The distinction is specifically thus: ./up is what fires when the service is brought up, ./down is what fires when the service is brought down, ./run is what fires when a non-running service is supposed to be running, and ./finish is when a running service stops. Just because

Re: Built-in ordering

2015-09-20 Thread Avery Payne
Regarding the use of ordering during "stage 1", couldn't you just have a single definition for stage 1, run through it to set up whatever is needed, then transition to a new system state that doesn't include that defintion with (insert system management here)? What I am trying to ask is if the