> By definition, the s6-linux-init binaries have to reside on the root > partition. That includes s6-linux-init-hpr. There is no reason to > move that binary away. > The only s6-linux-init binary that would make sense to have on a > different partition is s6-linux-init-maker, because it's not used at > boot or shutdown time. You can package it that way if you want. > But s6-linux-init-hpr has to stay on the root partition. You *might* > manage to make it work otherwise, but I think you'll find the trade-offs > are just not worth it. > This is not a request to change s6-linux-init in any way. I understand that it must reside on root and I am convinced that this is a good solution. I am doing an experiment here, depending on the outcome of which I might change my own scripts (also including an init script). Thats why I am asking whether remounting read-only over umounting would be feasable.
> One of the differences between boot and shutdown is that when booting, > you know exactly what state your machine is in, and what processes are > running on it. But when shutting down, you don't. Even if (a) is true > in the beginning, users can launch backgrounded nohup scripts that > detach > from their login session and evade control by any instance of > s6-supervise. That is an entirely legitimate use of the machine's > resources, you cannot forbid it. So you cannot rely on (a). > That was exactly what I was unsure about and the main reason I came to ask here, thank you! > As is, a s6-linux-init shutdown, even with a normal grace period, is > *much* faster than an OpenRC shutdown, and to my knowledge, a little > faster than a systemd shutdown. I see no benefit in trying to make it > even faster at the price of reliability. > I am not trying to make it faster, but to cut down on complexity, I now understand that this specific complexity is really necessary. Best regards, Paul Sopka
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
