Init Patch for review and evaluation

Denys Vlasenko vda.linux at googlemail.com
Mon Dec 24 13:44:15 UTC 2007


On Sunday 23 December 2007 01:36, Eugene Bordenkircher wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-12-23 at 00:39 +0000, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Saturday 22 December 2007 22:42, Eugene Bordenkircher wrote:
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > The following patch to init fills a need that myself and several of my
> > > co-workers have.  The general idea is to have init kill those processes
> > > that have been removed from the inittab file after it has received a
> > > SIGHUP.  Currently, init will let them continue to run, but will not
> > > respawn them if they die.
> > >
> > > The changes were added as a selectable feature in the busybox config.
> > > Hopefully the patch will help others as well.
> > >
> > > Please respond with any comments/concerns/suggestions to help clarify
> > > or improve the implementation.
> >
> > Sorry. I don't think that this is worth doing.
> >
> > The patch itself is not bad, the idea of "fixing" init is.
> >
> > I would like to ask you to read the following:
> >
> > http://busybox.net/~vda/init_vs_runsv.html
> >
> > If you think my arguments are flawed, feel free to let
> > me know your thoughts.
> > --
> > vda
>
> Fair enough,
>
> The patch was never intended as a 'fix', more of an optional feature.
>
> Your arguments against init and for runit seem fairly sound to me.  To
> be honest, I've never had the opportunity to play with runit.  I will
> try it in our device and see if it fits our needs better.

If it does not, can I ask you to sacrifice five minutes of your time
and explain what do you need to achieve, and why runit utilities
cannot help.
--
vda



More information about the busybox mailing list