4 ms·

They're really still going through with that? I didn't expect I'd have to find another distro so soon.

by jart 4y ago

dannyobrien 4y ago
what's the objection?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
CharlesW 4y ago
Can you elaborate on why this is relationship-ending for you? https://skarnet.org/software/s6/why.html https://skarnet.org/software/s6/why.html makes it seem like a reasonable direction.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- pronoiac 4y ago
  I'm not the OP, but a past employer used it on some legacy systems. It makes some choices, like avoiding spinning up new processes, that feel like it's been optimized for embedded systems. It uses a new-to-me language, that we never invested time in. So doing things like "send polite shutdown signals, wait 30 seconds, send harsher shutdown signals" became a matter of separate scripts or documentation. In short, you'd need more context for working with it than with other systems.
  - skarnet 4y ago
    Your information is incorrect. "Avoiding spinning up new processes" is incorrect characterization of s6. Processes are not a scarce resource; spawning a process is not a costly operation in the context of process supervision, even on embedded systems. s6 focuses on optimizing some metrics that are indeed important to embedded systems, like RAM use and code path length, but "spinning up new processes" isn't one of these metrics. It is not, and has never been, necessary to learn execline, the scripting language you're speaking of, in order to use s6. execline is used _internally_, and you can also use it in your own scripts if you so choose, but it is not a requirement. "Sending a polite shutdown signal, waiting for some time, and sending a harsher shutdown signal" is a matter of exactly one command: s6-svc -d. That is precisely one of the benefits of s6 over other daemontools-style supervisors: it handles this sequence natively. I welcome fact-based criticism of s6. I do not welcome FUD-based criticism.
rahen 4y ago
It will only be an option, you can keep sysvinit + openrc if you prefer it this way.
stock_toaster 4y ago
Based on my reading of [1] and [2] it sounds a bit more nuanced than "just incorporate s6 into alpine". [1]: https://ariadne.space/2021/03/25/lets-build-a-new-service-manager-for-alpine/ https://ariadne.space/2021/03/25/lets-build-a-new-service-ma... [2]: https://skarnet.com/projects/service-manager.html https://skarnet.com/projects/service-manager.html

They're really still going through with that? I didn't expect I'd have to find another distro so soon.

by jart 4y ago

They're really still going through with that? I didn't expect I'd have to find another distro so soon.

dannyobrien 4y ago

what's the objection?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

CharlesW 4y ago

Can you elaborate on why this is relationship-ending for you? https://skarnet.org/software/s6/why.html https://skarnet.org/software/s6/why.html makes it seem like a reasonable direction.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pronoiac 4y ago
I'm not the OP, but a past employer used it on some legacy systems. It makes some choices, like avoiding spinning up new processes, that feel like it's been optimized for embedded systems. It uses a new-to-me language, that we never invested time in. So doing things like "send polite shutdown signals, wait 30 seconds, send harsher shutdown signals" became a matter of separate scripts or documentation. In short, you'd need more context for working with it than with other systems.
- skarnet 4y ago
  Your information is incorrect. "Avoiding spinning up new processes" is incorrect characterization of s6. Processes are not a scarce resource; spawning a process is not a costly operation in the context of process supervision, even on embedded systems. s6 focuses on optimizing some metrics that are indeed important to embedded systems, like RAM use and code path length, but "spinning up new processes" isn't one of these metrics. It is not, and has never been, necessary to learn execline, the scripting language you're speaking of, in order to use s6. execline is used _internally_, and you can also use it in your own scripts if you so choose, but it is not a requirement. "Sending a polite shutdown signal, waiting for some time, and sending a harsher shutdown signal" is a matter of exactly one command: s6-svc -d. That is precisely one of the benefits of s6 over other daemontools-style supervisors: it handles this sequence natively. I welcome fact-based criticism of s6. I do not welcome FUD-based criticism.

rahen 4y ago

It will only be an option, you can keep sysvinit + openrc if you prefer it this way.

stock_toaster 4y ago

Based on my reading of [1] and [2] it sounds a bit more nuanced than "just incorporate s6 into alpine". [1]: https://ariadne.space/2021/03/25/lets-build-a-new-service-manager-for-alpine/ https://ariadne.space/2021/03/25/lets-build-a-new-service-ma... [2]: https://skarnet.com/projects/service-manager.html https://skarnet.com/projects/service-manager.html