Re: taxonomy of dependencies

Wayne Marshall: Under a supervision framework, failure of a service starting is absolutely ok. (Many novices fail to grasp the elegance of this essential feature.) ... and novices and non-novices alike fail to grasp its unscalability. It may be fine on a hobbyist PC, but on a server in a da

Re: dependant services

Buck Evan: For example, I'd like to encode the fact that I don't expect service A to be able to come up before service B. In nosh, the filesystem is the database. This is an ordering, not a dependency. One can separately encode in nosh (a) that start of service B will cause the start of se

Re: Arch Linux derivative using s6?

Avery Payne: There's already a project for adding definitions for various daemons. http://bitbucket.org/avery_payne/supervision-scripts There are even more than that. I mentioned back in January that the nosh Guide chapter on creating service bundles has pointers to the run file collections

Re: taxonomy of dependencies

(Gah, idiotically neglected the proper destination.) It seems to me that the domineering philosophy for fault tolerance is, indeed, to let it crash and let the individual state management of services coupled with any existing supervisor trees and priority rankings to do their work. From my per

Re: Arch Linux derivative using s6?

On 5/14/2015 3:47 PM, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote: There are even more than that. I mentioned back in January that the nosh Guide chapter on creating service bundles has pointers to the run file collections by Gerrit Pape, Wayne Marshall, Kevin J. DeGraaf, and Glenn Strauss. I also point

RE: Arch Linux derivative using s6?

For some comic relief: "We are systemd. You will be assimilated. Your projects and software will be deprecated, reinvented, and added into our own, and made to service us. Resistance is futile." -Lenncutus of Borg. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Avery Payne