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.