Your message dated Sat, 14 Dec 2013 23:02:45 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: [Pkg-systemd-maintainers] Bug#732157: Want SIGSTOP-style
daemon/service readiness notification
has caused the Debian Bug report #732157,
regarding Want SIGSTOP-style daemon/service readiness notification
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
732157: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=732157
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: systemd
Version: 204-5
Severity: wishlist
It would be nice if systemd could implement the service supervisor
side of the service readiness protocol that upstart calls "expect
stop":
The service doesn't fork, and when considers itself ready it raises
SIGSTOP. The supervisor can observe this via the usual mechanisms,
being the service's parent, and when it occurs it sends the service
CONT and starts whatever was waiting for readiness.
The sd_notify(3) protocol is just about tolerable, and it is good that
it's documented, but it is quite unattractive for a daemon author:
Either they have to add a build- and runtime- dependency on a
systemd-specific library, or they have to reimplement a fairly tedious
piece of socket code.
For a daemon author, raise(SIGSTOP) is lovely and simple.
I guess this would be a new "Type" (but I'm still halfway through the
docs so no expert).
Ian.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
control: forwarded -1 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833105
control: tags -1 + upstream wontfix
Hi Ian,
thanks for your mail. This feature request was already raised upstream
and upstream decided to not implement it. Please see the provided URL
for more details.
Ian Jackson <[email protected]> writes:
> The sd_notify(3) protocol is just about tolerable, and it is good that
> it's documented, but it is quite unattractive for a daemon author:
> Either they have to add a build- and runtime- dependency on a
> systemd-specific library, or they have to reimplement a fairly tedious
> piece of socket code.
If you are concerned with build- and runtime-dependencies, note that
libsystemd-daemon only consists of the file sd-daemon.c¹. That code has
no dependencies aside from libc. It is explicitly kept that way so that
one can drop it into a daemon’s source directory and build that daemon
without any additional dependencies.
Now, if one should encourage this behavior from a maintenance and code
duplication point of view is another question, but the option is
provided at least, and it might make sense in some projects.
①
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/src/libsystemd-daemon/sd-daemon.c
--
Best regards,
Michael
--- End Message ---
