3 ms·
This is nice and all, but the way the authors wrote this article gives off this feeling of hubris that they've uncovered some critical yet technically obscure p
by vezzy-fnord 12y ago
This is nice and all, but the way the authors wrote this article gives off this feeling of hubris that they've uncovered some critical yet technically obscure problem.
They haven't. This is Unix programming 101 right here. Even if the Docker community has been generally ignorant of this, the problem is not any less glaring or basic.
I'm not sure if my_init is really an "init system", though. I'd call it an "init daemon", since it handles the bare minimum of waiting on its children. A system would imply greater complexity.
- FooBarWidget 12y agoAuthor of the article here. Of course it's a basic Unix programming 101... from our points of view! You and I think it's basic because we're so knowledgeable in this area. But this does not hold for the rest of the world. 99 out of 100 people that I've spoken to have absolutely no idea about this problem. I used to link to the Wikipedia article and thought that people would get it. They didn't. People started getting it once I gave 15 minute talks about the problem and describing things with diagrams. Lots of people gave me the suggestion that I should blog about it, and so I did.
- vezzy-fnord 12y agoThere is no relative point of view here. This is simply an egregious educational failure where application developers have failed to understand the underpinnings of how their platform handles processes at a high level. Then again, this is how the industry works, I suppose. You rediscover an old paradigm or basic property of your system that has been abstracted out, present it as new, deliver it in a shiny package and reap the fame. Sorry, I was mostly ticked at how you presented this issue in such an alarmist and "problem-reaction-solution" tone. It's just humorous.