On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 3:22 PM Steve Litt wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 05:18:33 -0800
> Cameron Nemo wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 4:45 AM Steve Litt
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > In my computer usage, I usually need about 5 minutes to gracefully
> > > exit all my programs before powering
17.02.2020, 11:00, "innerspacepilot" :
> Just as a thought: You have implemented signal diversion, but limited to
> known signals. Why not just pass unknown signals as numbers or something
> like (S6SIG55011), so they can be diverted by user? You wouldn't have to
> catalogue them.
absolutely
17.02.2020, 15:45, "Jeff" :
> what about SIGINT and SIGWINCH ? are they required by the POSIX
> standard ? if not why does runit handle both ?
oh no, i just saw that it "POSIX-correctly" ignores SIGWINCH ...
the BSD kernels do not send SIGWINCH to process #1, so (ab)using
it violates the POSIX
12.02.2020, 22:54, "Colin Booth" :
> far as I know SIGPWR is a Linux-specific signal so services that are
> aiming for portability will either need to have special handling for
> that in the linux case or need to ignore it. Ergo, runit (and all other
> POSIX-compliant inits) currently have no
14.02.2020, 13:29, "innerspacepilot" :
> I would suggest it should be a graceful shutdown ( stopping all daemons,
> syncing filesystems and stuff )
yes, of course, this should preceed the powerdown step.
a more "correct" solution would be the approach taken by SysV init
via the "powerfail"
Great, your point I wanted to hear especially.
But, well, I am disillusioned with my hops for s6.
My fault about SIGPWR, RTMIN+3 should be used instead, please, treat
SIGPWR as a template for any other signal name, that doesn't matter.
Not only me who want this "lxd simplicity", e.g.
