On Wed, May 01, 2019 at 08:09:58PM -0300, Guillermo wrote:
> El mar., 30 abr. 2019 a las 5:55, Laurent Bercot escribió:
> >
> > >haven't you claimed process #1 should supervise long running
> > >child processes ? runit fulfils exactly this requirement by
> > >supervising the supervisor.
> >
> > Not
El mar., 30 abr. 2019 a las 5:55, Laurent Bercot escribió:
>
> >haven't you claimed process #1 should supervise long running
> >child processes ? runit fulfils exactly this requirement by
> >supervising the supervisor.
>
> Not exactly, no.
> If something kills runsvdir, then runit immediately enter
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
supe
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 21:19:58 +0200
Jeff wrote:
> 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."
Oh,
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 21:19:58 +0200
Jeff wrote:
> 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."
Oh,
