Re: Scripting Stage 3 and 4

[Paul Sopka]

Thanks for the answer, I understand it better now.



I found these arguments a little weak:

To be honest I had to get a little bit used to this unconventional way of shutting down.

you want to be able
to recover and get a shell until the very end, and you don't want your
pid 1 to accidentally get killed

Since you can get a shell easily in the finish script too:

| if -n { mount -o remount,ro / }
| sh



But getting a more advanced recovery method up,
e.g. an ssh server when you only have remote access
or an agetty instead of PID 1 sh on a desktop machine,
will be more reliable under a supervision tree, I can see that.

Further, I was wondering about how to implement such a fallback, would:

| if -n { mount -o remount,ro / }
| foreground { s6-svc -U /run/service/recovery }

(With what "recovery" is being a decision of the sysadmin)
Something like this hold up well enough?


if something can be implemented well in another way (as is the case here),
it should be.




pointed out in any of the scripts I post,


I wish you all a nice weekend,

Paul

And accidentally killing PID 1 would break the supervision tree based approach too, right? One could also argue that the finish script of s6-svscan is really a last resort and, Anyhow, you have convinced me that keeping the supervision tree is the better way. Finally, if there is anything that could fundamentally be done better in the script, please tell me. This is to everybody here, I am happy about every GNU'ism or util-linux'ism as I try to make all my scripts work with pure POSIX + ( ubase | toybox | busybox ).

OpenPGP_0x71C7C85A2EA30F62.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature