Re: Process isolation support for start-stop-daemon

2014-03-20 Thread Andrew Shadura
Hello, On Thu, 20 Mar 2014 07:08:39 +0100 Guillem Jover wrote: > > > * Some system calls are missing proper error checks. > > > * The quiet warnings seem suspect, I'd say they should either be > > > actual errors or normal warnings. > > Well, those warnings don't necessarily mean something we

Re: Process isolation support for start-stop-daemon

2014-03-19 Thread Guillem Jover
On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 18:13:51 +0100, Andrew Shadura wrote: > On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 05:35:41 +0100 Guillem Jover wrote: > > Then there's several implementation details, here's a short list from > > a quick skimming (ignoring style issues and similar): > > > * The command-line option should always be

Re: Process isolation support for start-stop-daemon

2014-03-17 Thread Andrew Shadura
Hello, On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 05:35:41 +0100 Guillem Jover wrote: > First, would be defining in a system-independent way what such option > implies, and how and if it can be extended in the future, like what > restrictions, guarantees and expectactions should the process get, > etc. Depending on th

Re: Process isolation support for start-stop-daemon

2014-03-15 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Sat, 2014-03-08 at 14:13:41 +0100, Andrew Shadura wrote: > Yesterday I've hacked process isolation support into start-stop-daemon. > The feature is available for Linux only, but the option itself is > accepted even if the kernel support isn't available. > > More details see in my blog, > h