On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:32 PM, Nicolas George <geo...@nsup.org> wrote: > Le primidi 21 germinal, an CCXXV, to...@tuxteam.de a écrit : >> > Your other arguments make sense, but sorry, this one does not. The >> > process with PID one is the only immortal process on the system, and >> > adopts all orphan processes. For that reason, any kind of process >> > monitoring, if it needs reliability, must be rooted in PID 1. And in >> > turn, that makes process monitoring in scope for any project that aims >> > to implement a program for PID 1. >> >> Runit works. Think about how :-) > > No need to think how: runit takes PID 1. You prove my point. > > (runit can also be integrated with the rudimentary monitoring of SysV > init: hacks upon hacks)
Hacks upon hacks, refactored, is another way to look at stepwise refinement. > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas George -- Joel Rees I'm imagining I'm a novelist: http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.com/2017/01/soc500-00-00-toc.html More of my delusions: http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/p/novels-i-am-writing.html
