Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-28 Thread Laurent Bercot
The idea is that with a docker-targeted s6 tarball, it should universally work on top of any / all base image. Just to make things perfectly clear: I am not going to make a special version of s6 just for Docker. I like Docker, I think it's a useful tool, and I'm willing to support it, as in

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-28 Thread Laurent Bercot
On 28/02/2015 11:58, Laurent Bercot wrote: (In case you can't tell: I'm not a github fan. Meh. At this time, publicity is a good thing for my software, even if 1. it's still a bit early, and 2. I have to use tools I'm not entirely comfortable with. So I set up mirrors of everything on

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-27 Thread Dreamcat4
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Gorka Lertxundi glertxu...@gmail.com wrote: Dreamcat4, pull request are always welcomed! 2015-02-27 0:40 GMT+01:00 Laurent Bercot ska-supervis...@skarnet.org: On 26/02/2015 21:53, John Regan wrote: Besides, the whole idea here is to make an image that

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-27 Thread Dreamcat4
* Once there are 2+ similar s6 images. * May be worth to consult Docker Inc employees about official / base image builds on the hub. Here is an example of why we might benefit from seeking help from Docker Inc: * Multiple FROM images (multiple inheritance). There should already be an open

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-27 Thread Dreamcat4
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Dreamcat4 dreamc...@gmail.com wrote: * Once there are 2+ similar s6 images. * May be worth to consult Docker Inc employees about official / base image builds on the hub. Here is an example of why we might benefit from seeking help from Docker Inc: *

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-27 Thread Gorka Lertxundi
Dreamcat4, pull request are always welcomed! 2015-02-27 0:40 GMT+01:00 Laurent Bercot ska-supervis...@skarnet.org: On 26/02/2015 21:53, John Regan wrote: Besides, the whole idea here is to make an image that follows best practices, and best practices state we should be using a process

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-27 Thread Dreamcat4
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Laurent Bercot ska-supervis...@skarnet.org wrote: On 26/02/2015 21:53, John Regan wrote: Besides, the whole idea here is to make an image that follows best practices, and best practices state we should be using a process supervisor that cleans up orphaned

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-26 Thread John Regan
I think you're better off with: * Case 1 : docker run --entrypoint= image commandline (with or without -ti depending on whether you need an interactive terminal) * Case 2 : docker run image * Case 3: docker run image commandline (with or without -ti depending on whether you need an

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-26 Thread John Regan
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:37:23PM +0100, Laurent Bercot wrote: On 26/02/2015 14:11, John Regan wrote: Just to clarify, docker run spins up a new container, so that wouldn't work for stopping a container. It would just spin up a new container running s6-svscanctl -t service To stop, you

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-26 Thread John Regan
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 08:23:47PM +, Dreamcat4 wrote: You CANNOT enforce specific ENTRYPOINT + CMD usages amongst docker users. It will never work because too many people use docker in too many different ways. And it does not matter from a technical perspective for the solution I have

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-26 Thread Dreamcat4
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Gorka Lertxundi glertxu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, My name is Gorka, not Gornak! It seems like suddenly I discovered that I was born in the eastern europe! hehe :) I'll answer to both of you, mixed, so try not to get confused. Lets go, But Gornak - I must

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-26 Thread Laurent Bercot
On 26/02/2015 21:53, John Regan wrote: Besides, the whole idea here is to make an image that follows best practices, and best practices state we should be using a process supervisor that cleans up orphaned processes and stuff. You should be encouraging people to run their programs, interactively

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-25 Thread John Regan
Hi Dreamcat4 - First thing's first - I can't stress enough how awesome it is to know people are using/talking about my Docker images, blog posts, and so on. Too cool! I've responded to your concerns/questions/etc throughout the email below. -John On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:32:37AM +,

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-25 Thread John Regan
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 03:58:07PM +0100, Gorka Lertxundi wrote: Hello, After that great john's post, I tried to solve exactly your same problems. I created my own base image based primarily on John's and Phusion's base images. That's awesome - I get so excited when I hear somebody's

Re: process supervisor - considerations for docker

2015-02-25 Thread Laurent Bercot
(Moving the discussion to the supervision@list.skarnet.org list. The original message is quoted below.) Hi Dreamcat4, Thanks for your detailed message. I'm very happy that s6 found an application in docker, and that there's such an interest for it! skaw...@list.skarnet.org is indeed the