On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 02:00:17AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote: > On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 18:53:44 +0300 > Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote: > > > Hello Jonathan, > > > > On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 02:47:39PM +0100, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard > > wrote: > > > > Type=forking > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > StandardOutput=tty > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > RemainAfterExit=yes > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > SysVStartPriority=99 > > > > > > No. > > > > I know I know, I did not read the manuals on > > systemd. > > And why should you? You're using daemontools to > escape as many processes as possible out of > systemd's clutches, and there's nothing wrong > with copying off stackexchange and letting the > list know what worked. You're not expected to be > a systemd expert.
I like simplicite of D.J. Bernstein, and s6 gives me nice tools for each system without complexities, in the D.J. Bernstein way. It is long time ago that I found daemontools, it was most natural. If I remember well it was even packaged in Debian systems. init.d could not just keep everything always running, daemontools could. > > > You're a long-time daemontools user, you say. > > > Why on Earth do you think that Type=forking is > > > right? > > > > Because I don't think, I copied and it works, if > > you did not tell me know, it would remain so for > > years probably. I know I should be more > > responsible, but I have placed before daemontools > > in /etc/inittab and just forgot about it, I guess > > that is wanted effect. > > You don't really need to apologize. You apparently weren't completely > correct, and it worked well enough to make it seem correct. And some > guy comes on, gives you four "no"s without reasons, imply that you're > falsely bragging about being a daemontools user, and then gives you one > of those "why on earth" type things. Of course I have seen that, and I don't mind, it is just my way of handling communication. You know how people come into fights? When explaining about the methods of communication instead of the subject of communication. So I try to avoid speaking of methods, as it does not bring much -- but rather of subjects. > > I don't think really, and I tried the one-shot > > method too, but that was not the problem that I > > was not exiting. > > > > This one I changed > > > > RemainAfterExit=no > > > > and now after systemd "start" it exits. > > > > > Why on Earth do you think that svscan -- any > > > svscan, from daemontools-encore svscan to > > > s6-svscan -- forks and exits parent? Or needs a > > > TTY? > > > > You are right, I did not check enough. > > I'm sure you *DIDN'T* think that, and you really don't owe this guy an > explanation, because he's sure not here to help you. > > Laurent's right. Go on a systemd list or IRC, tell them you need to > spawn daemontools, tell them daemontools does not put itself in the > background, and that you want it restarted if it stops. They'll tell > you what to do. By the way, you might have to tell it to put /command > on the $PATH. If you need that and you cannot get systemd to handle it, > I'll give you a shellscript to get it done. It is related to both, and more to this list I guess, as people here will know more what is it about. There would it be as conflict of interest, just as here, but I guess more there... as a black sheep in white sheep crowd. I like reasoning behind daemontools, and Laurent's reasoning, and that software just works. The daemontools and now s6 supervision is simply running 3 tiny web servers accepting the leads through Nginx, and that is how wealth is created. Jean
