DragonFly BSD
DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2005-02
[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: rc and smf

From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 20:27:40 +0100
Mail-followup-to: kernel@crater.dragonflybsd.org

On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 02:05:35PM -0500, George Georgalis wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 03:49:42PM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> >I consider most of daemontools useless software, because it is build
> >on the wrong assumptions. A normal daemon should not need supervision,
> >just like a normal daemon can either write its own log files [if the
> >volume is high] or just use syslog.
> I run apache under supervise. I use the apache internal logging facility
> for each virtual domain access.log, because it does exactly what I
> need, but I run a multilog instance for each virtual domain error log,
> as that works better for me than error.log.  All of this is separate
> from the apache daemon logs (restarts etc), which are under multilog as
> well as the apache run script. The entire installation is very modular,
> and has worked very well, over the years (nearly 2).

And exactly this kind of setup can be made with the standard syslog
interface as well, it doesn't buy anything with the exception that
I can restart my log daemon.  Don't get me wrong, I don't want you
to switch over to using syslog, if multilog works for you. It might
very well be the perfect tool. Actually apache especially with mod_php
is an example of unstable software IMO, it tends to segfault at times.
Nothing critical, enough parallel processes to just take over.

> Making a runit port for a base BSD would be a lot of work: code and
> commiter philosophy -- I'd be interested, but I certainly don't have
> time for it. What I do ask is that it remain an option for users,
> so no unusual roadblocks, technical or otherwise, remain for those
> who want to use it.

There's a port for runit and it should be pretty easy to tell it to run
the normal /etc/rc for initialisation. I don't want runit in the
base system [or similiar tools] and parallel startup for rcNG is surely
possible, but adds some difficult problems as well. I'm not a friend
of the "My system needs only 15.656 seconds to boot" style dick


[Date Prev][Date Next]  [Thread Prev][Thread Next]  [Date Index][Thread Index]