El dom., 19 may. 2019 a las 8:24, fungal-net escribió:
>
> [...]
> This is Adélie adelielinux.org
> installation on HD. Although it is confusing to me how they set this up
> still, after months of following its development (beta3), there is
> sysvinit on the first steps of booting then OpenRC
Guillermo:
>> But although I got curious what "kill -9 -1" would do to different
>> systems I don't see the usefulness of this.
>
> Since you actually went ahead and did it, and reported the results,
> for me it was interesting to see if they matched what theory says that
> would happen. They did
The tests I did were on live images run as vm-s
Jeff:
> 18.05.2019, 00:58, "Guillermo" :
>>> OpenRC: Nice,
>>> init
>>> |_ zsh
>>> when I exited the shell there was nothing but a dead cursor on my screen
>
> in this case the shell is not signaled since "-1" does not signal the sending
18.05.2019, 00:58, "Guillermo" :
>> OpenRC: Nice,
>> init
>> |_ zsh
>> when I exited the shell there was nothing but a dead cursor on my screen
in this case the shell is not signaled since "-1" does not signal the sending
process.
> May I ask what was this setup like? You made a
Hi,
El vie., 17 may. 2019 a las 8:22, fungal-net escribió:
>
> OpenRC: Nice,
> init
>|_ zsh
> when I exited the shell there was nothing but a dead cursor on my screen
May I ask what was this setup like? You made a different entry for
sysvinit, presumably with the customary getty
On Wed, 15 May 2019 13:22:48 -0400
Steve Litt wrote:
> The preceding's true for you, but not for everyone. Some
> people, like myself, are perfectly happy with a 95% reliable system. I
> reboot once every 2 to 4 weeks to get rid of accumulated state, or as
> a troubleshooting diagnostic test. I
On Wed, 01 May 2019 18:13:53 +
"Laurent Bercot" wrote:
> >So Laurent's words from http://skarnet.org/software/s6/ were just
> >part of a very minor family quarrel, not a big deal, and nothing to
> >get worked up over.
>
> This very minor family quarrel is the whole difference between
>
So Laurent's words from http://skarnet.org/software/s6/ were just part
of a very minor family quarrel, not a big deal, and nothing to get
worked up over.
This very minor family quarrel is the whole difference between having
and not having a 100% reliable system, which is the whole point of
Jeff:
where can i learn how a "correct" init has to operate ?
See https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/197472/5132 for starters.
"suckless init is incorrect, because it has no supervision capabilities,
and thus, killing all processes but init can brick the machine."
a rather bold claim IMO !
where was the "correct" init behaviour specified ?
where can i learn how a "correct" init has to operate ?
For instance:
El lun., 29 abr. 2019 a las 16:46, Jeff escribió:
>
> "suckless init is incorrect, because it has no supervision capabilities,
> and thus, killing all processes but init can brick the machine."
>
> a rather bold claim IMO !
> where was the "correct" init behaviour specified ?
> where can i learn
i came across some interesting claims recently. on
http://skarnet.org/software/s6/
it reads
"suckless init is incorrect, because it has no supervision capabilities,
and thus, killing all processes but init can brick the machine."
a rather bold claim IMO !
where was the "correct&
12 matches
Mail list logo
