Hi Kees,
I agree we have found quite a few issues, and I haven't found find
the time to push these changes back upstream. Anyway my team has bet
heavily on upstart and I am not too impressed with its progress as of
now.
I hear there is next release that is being developed away from public
eyes.
There seems to more importance given to keeping some secret sauce code
secret, than driving and leading community development. It seems to me
that we are fogetting that this is open source code, which means the
secret sauce is not gonna be secret for too long. The real edge we have
is getting a community following. And I keep hearing on mailing list
that doesn't feel encouraged as well.
A few of weeks ago, I had half the mind to say hell with this and branch
upstart off and do our own development. And to be honest at this rate I
don't think its an option I have closed off. This is very discomforting
and would be a shame if I ended up doing that, as I think Scott has some
really good ideas for upstart. I just really wish he would show more
initiative in developing and leading a community that seems to be only
willing to help.
Sarvi
-----Original Message-----
From: upstart-devel-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com
[mailto:upstart-devel-boun...@lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Kees
Jongenburger
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:26 AM
To: Sandeep Puddupakkam (spuddupa)
Cc: Upstart Dev List; Scott James Remnant
Subject: Re: Upstart 0.5.0. Assertion causing kernel panic with respawn
stanza
Hello Sandeep,
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Sandeep Puddupakkam (spuddupa)
<spudd...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> We are using Upstart version 0.5.0.
> If a job has a respawn stanza and the main process terminates before
> post-start script ends, there is a assertion which is causing a kernel
> panic.
> This does not cause a assertion if the respawn stanza is not present.
> I am working on a fix for this issue.
> However I want to find out if this issue fixed in any of the newer
It's very nice to see somebody trying to fix issues in 0.5.x. We tried
to send a few patches in the past to fix some trivial issues but somehow
they did not end up in the code. The public upstart code is "dead". The
update 0.5* code is broken and critical bugs like yours where not
addressed in the past month so I am not holding my breath.
The bug you describe sounds similar to
https://bugs.launchpad.net/upstart/+bug/337640 but this is a per-stop
script.
Overall we think daemon, respawn and the start/stop on "something else"
is broken. This leaves us with upstart being able to start and stop
something and that is not very impressive. I think the daemon and
crashes are fixable but dependency handling is simply broken by design.
Kind regards
--
upstart-devel mailing list
upstart-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/upstart-devel
--
upstart-devel mailing list
upstart-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/upstart-devel
