Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek writes ("Bug#727708: requirement of non-forking startup protocol"): > | 8. Policy rules for support for init systems must: > | > | (a) Specify the use of a non-forking startup protocol (for > | upstart and systemd),
[ Replying to this thread after a large glass of wine is probalby a bad idea, but this one seems OK I hope. Please forgive me if I'm incoherent or rude, although of osurse I'll try not to be. ] > I'm not sure about upstart, but systemd is perfectly happy with > daemons which double fork (Type=forking in systemd parlance). > It is mildly discouraged, because: > > 1. it is hard to get right > 2. it is more code than the other options > 3. it is easier to start the program manually if non-forking protocol is used Am I right in thingking that this is what is described as "guess main pid" in the systemd documentation ? In which case it is indeed discouraged.q > For new code, other protocols are certainly better. But for existing > daemons which work correctly, points 1 and 2 don't matter, and 3 is not > important enough. I think if we're going to the trouble of converting all of the init systems, we should do so once and have them use the best arrangements. > This requirement might force mantainers to modify some hairy > internals in the startup code of daemons to avoid double forking. This > seems pointless, as in most cases it wouldn't result in any noticable > difference in speed or behaviour or correctness. Does this actualy arise as a problem in practice ? I find it difficult to think of a case where it would but perhaps you know of one. > I think this should be changed to: > > | 8. Policy rules for support for init systems must: > | > | (a) Encourage the use of a non-forking startup protocol (for > | upstart and systemd), In the case of upstart the -forking startup protocols are difficult to implement portably so in that case I think we should definitely retain a prohibition. I'm less sure about the systemd version of the resolution. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/21189.57948.423849.769...@chiark.greenend.org.uk