Dumb-init is more like nohup, or tee, or strace. It's for processes (most of them) that don't deal with being PID 1. So jumping through hoops to write a unit file feels like you're saying "do it the hard way" when I know perfectly well that I don't need to do it the hard way.
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Clayton Coleman <ccole...@redhat.com> wrote: > Please do not tell me that I want to write a unit file when the *entire* > ecosystem takes command lines just fine. I have hundreds of dockerfiles > that have entry points - why do I need to write unit files for them? I > have command line tools that generate docker images... with command lines - > why would I want to write unit files for them? > > Also, dumb-init is not an init system. It's a signal proxy. > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Scott McCarty <smcca...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> I am skeptical of any "resource" argument against systemd. Are you seeing >> some actually impact to performance that is causing problems? As for unit >> files, they are rediculously easy. Much easier than figuring out how to >> start a daemon properly by reading documentation. >> >> I don't have a strong opinion for CentOS/Fedora. But for RHEL, I think >> multiple init systems will just generate more technical questions from >> customers and eat up more sales resources explaining when people should use >> what. Options are great, but confusing, that's why Apple got rid of a lot >> of them... >> >> >> On 03/06/2017 09:48 PM, Clayton Coleman wrote: >> >>> Zero overhead, defunct process management, proper logging, simplicity, >>> no moving parts, no additional unit file (I don't have unit files). >>> >>> Turn it around - if I have the command line "ansible-playbook ...", what >>> does systemd get me? >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Eric Paris <epa...@redhat.com <mailto: >>> epa...@redhat.com>> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 2017-03-06 at 21:22 -0500, Clayton Coleman wrote: >>> > They'd be really helpful for cases where you don't want full blown >>> > systemd, but want a long running container that needs to reap >>> > processes. I don't know that one or the other matters, I have a >>> > slight bias for dumb-init in terms of signal rewriting (a few cases >>> > might need that). >>> > >>> > Anyone using these today? >>> >>> What does dumb-init or tini get me that systemd doesn't? >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> >> Scott McCarty, RHCA >> >> Technical Product Marketing: Containers >> >> Email: smcca...@redhat.com >> >> Phone: 312-660-3535 >> >> Cell: 330-807-1043 >> >> Web: http://crunchtools.com >> >> When should you split your application into multiple containers? >> http://red.ht/22xKw9i >> >> >
