On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:45:51 -0700 Steve Langasek <[email protected]> wrote:
[...] > There's also the matter that if your daemon is being run in the > foreground, other services depend on it, and you're not using socket > activation, there's ambiguity as to when the service is actually > "started". A racy startup is a bad thing. Doesn't exactly the same problem exist with "classic" daemons? I mean, as soon as a daemon being started forked once, the parent instance has no idea whether the forked instance actually managed to complete initialization, and if it did then when. Unless some sort of communication channel is used. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
