El lun., 29 abr. 2019 a las 16:46, Jeff escribió:
>
> "suckless init is incorrect, because it has no supervision capabilities,
> and thus, killing all processes but init can brick the machine."
>
> a rather bold claim IMO !
> where was the "correct" init behaviour specified ?
> where can i learn
At
http://skarnet.org/software/s6/why.html
one can find further interesting claims:
> The runit process, not the runsvdir process,
> runs as process 1. This lengthens the supervision chain.
haven't you claimed process #1 should supervise long running
child processes ? runit fulfils exactly
i came across some interesting claims recently. on
http://skarnet.org/software/s6/
it reads
"suckless init is incorrect, because it has no supervision capabilities,
and thus, killing all processes but init can brick the machine."
a rather bold claim IMO !
where was the "correct" init behaviour
