Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...

From	Nicolas George <george@nsup.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.user
Subject	Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...
Date	2017-04-14 13:10 +0200
Message-ID	<tw7gZ-nF-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<tvTQK-8fn-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <tvUtr-jx-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <tw5fb-7mS-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <tw61z-7Ud-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <tw6NY-8pV-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Le quintidi 25 germinal, an CCXXV, tomas@tuxteam.de a écrit :
> Thanks for you nice, condescending tone. Very much appreciated.

I am sorry you take it that way. It was not meant to, and thinking about
it again, I see nothing condescending in assuming, based on your
statement, that you are not familiar with the obsession of a fringe of
the Libre software developer community.

> Besides, PERFECTLY, oh, well. ECC RAM. Redundant processors. Formally
> validated software.

Well, your irritation made you do something dishonest: ridiculing a
point of my discourse ignoring that I addressed exactly the same issue
in the next paragraph.

> I never said SysV's PID scheme is a good idea. For me it's "good enough",

Well, you realize it is good enough *for you*, there are a lot of people
who consider it not good enough for them.

> but I mentioned enough alternatives. You have to make sure that the
> monitor process doesn't die (modulo things which can happen to PID 1
> too), and that's pretty feasible whithin a current Linux system (the
> OOM killer you mention, for example: PostgreSQL excludes its postmaster
> from that; you've to make sure that the monitor process doesn't get
> out of control, but that's achieved by keeping it simple and small).

You can do all you want, PID 1 is still the only immortal process on the
system.

And if every single daemon must implement workarounds for the
limitations of SysV init, I say this is a seriously flawed design.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <j.deboynepollard-newsgroups@ntlworld.com> - 2017-04-13 22:50 +0200
  Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-04-13 23:30 +0200
    Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-14 01:30 +0200
      Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-04-14 11:50 +0200
        Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-04-15 00:00 +0200
    Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-04-14 11:00 +0200
      Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-04-14 11:50 +0200
        Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... tomas@tuxteam.de - 2017-04-14 12:40 +0200
          Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ... Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-04-14 13:10 +0200

csiph-web