Interesting article on boot ordering
Bill Rugolsky Jr.
brugolsky at telemetry-investments.com
Wed Sep 24 13:17:14 UTC 2003
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 08:44:06AM -0400, David T Hollis wrote:
> Bryan W. Headley wrote:
> >Re: speed/quality of sysvinit versus minit or runit. The tradeoffs
> >you're getting is that minit "knows" one of it's spawned services have
> >stopped, and can react to that. sysvinit really doesn't know about
> >errors...
>
> This is one that a lot of folks are hankering for. I'm not sure myself
> if that is necessarily the job of the init program. There are a great
> number of services that don't have a tendency to die with any frequency
> worth adding all of the overhead of an init monitoring deal and in the
> cases where it is required, there are quite possibly better solutions
> such as keepalived that can monitor and make more intelligent decisions
> about the process.
The real problem with sysvinit is that it provides supervision, via
/etc/inittab, and modularity, via /etc/rc.d/init.d/*, but no mechanism
for using both. Dynamically adding a supervised service involves editing
/etc/inittab -- ugh.
At work, I am currently in the process of deploying runit to supplement
sysvinit for services that I want to monitor.
E.g., I have USB modems for dial-in that I'd like to be able to
auto-configure with mgetty when I move the modem between servers.
Doing this with sysvinit is painful. I suppose the alternative to runit
would be to hack up sysvinit to grok /etc/inittab.d/
Regards,
Bill Rugolsky
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list