On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Laurent Bercot wrote:

> >If you are a systemd user, chances are you do not need s6.
> >
> >Really? So all the criticism of systemd is bunkum?
>  :) I need to update this page.
>  What this means is that systemd does provide a supervision
> infrastructure, so for people stuck with systemd, it's okay to use what
> their system provides, and s6 is redundant there. This does not mean
> that all my systemd criticism is invalid.
>  Also, admittedly, I simply did not want to read the systemd unit file
> documentation to understand how to start a s6 supervision tree from
> systemd. I will do the effort and come up with a small unit file
> suitable for this.

Thanks. I would rather you write one small unit file then me needing to 
write ten or fifteen of them.

I agree with you about the systemd unit file documentation. That's exactly 
why I still need runit or s6. Well, one of the reasons.

Reply via email to