4 ms·

both sides are really toxic here. that's a problem. even a compile time switch was not feasible for tmux (to enable pam). while systemd still lacks a good api

by merb 10y ago

both sides are really toxic here. that's a problem. even a compile time switch was not feasible for tmux (to enable pam). while systemd still lacks a good api design that is close to daemon(). in a world with so much communication we should at least try to work together..

jononor 10y ago
Why is something like daemon() needed with systemd? Typically you just run your process as if it was in the foreground, and systemd handles the rest. What do you lose?
- digi_owl 10y ago
  Tmux, GNU Screen, nohup, detach...
  - creshal 10y ago
    Unless you change a single config setting in systemd. Which distributions already do for you.
    - JdeBP 10y ago
      Changing the config settings that logind applies to session units is the inferior solution. The superior solution is for logind to use KillUnit to send a hangup signal, leaving StopUnit for use at system shutdown. * https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=825394#221 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=825394#221
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - vetinari 10y ago
    daemon() doesn't distinguish between terminal window life cycle and desktop session life cycle. That was the original issue that caused the problem with systemd, not detaching process from terminal.
X-Istence 10y ago
Adding any type of compile time switch adds extra maintenance burden and adds one more thing to test, one more thing that needs to be checked for regressions. One more thing may not seem like much, but increasing the maintenance burden on a project that had nothing to do with the reason something was broken in the first place seems incredibly one-sided and wrong.
- creshal 10y ago
  It's not that simple. Without PAM support, tmux is already broken, even on non-systemd distributions, in some corner cases. E.g., starting gpg-agent the "wrong" way breaks it inside tmux sessions, even on sysvinit, if tmux does not register PAM sessions. But, of course, because the bug is only seeing wide-spread attention since systemd triggers it more often, it can't get fixed, because Lennart is the reason we cannot have nice things. Or something.

by merb 10y ago

jononor 10y ago

Why is something like daemon() needed with systemd? Typically you just run your process as if it was in the foreground, and systemd handles the rest. What do you lose?

digi_owl 10y ago
Tmux, GNU Screen, nohup, detach...
- creshal 10y ago
  Unless you change a single config setting in systemd. Which distributions already do for you.
  - JdeBP 10y ago
    Changing the config settings that logind applies to session units is the inferior solution. The superior solution is for logind to use KillUnit to send a hangup signal, leaving StopUnit for use at system shutdown. * https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=825394#221 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=825394#221
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- vetinari 10y ago
  daemon() doesn't distinguish between terminal window life cycle and desktop session life cycle. That was the original issue that caused the problem with systemd, not detaching process from terminal.

X-Istence 10y ago

Adding any type of compile time switch adds extra maintenance burden and adds one more thing to test, one more thing that needs to be checked for regressions. One more thing may not seem like much, but increasing the maintenance burden on a project that had nothing to do with the reason something was broken in the first place seems incredibly one-sided and wrong.

creshal 10y ago
It's not that simple. Without PAM support, tmux is already broken, even on non-systemd distributions, in some corner cases. E.g., starting gpg-agent the "wrong" way breaks it inside tmux sessions, even on sysvinit, if tmux does not register PAM sessions. But, of course, because the bug is only seeing wide-spread attention since systemd triggers it more often, it can't get fixed, because Lennart is the reason we cannot have nice things. Or something.