Received: from mx1.tetrasec.net (mx1.tetrasec.net [66.245.176.36]) by nld3-dev1.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21822782C86 for <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 18:16:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.tetrasec.net (mail.local [127.0.0.1]) by mx1.tetrasec.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7995EF5893; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 18:16:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ncopa-macbook.copa.dup.pw (67.63.200.37.customer.cdi.no [37.200.63.67]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: alpine@tanael.org) by mx1.tetrasec.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DDEE2F5892; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 18:16:42 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 19:16:40 +0100 From: Natanael Copa To: Ariadne Conill Cc: =?UTF-8?B?U8O2cmVu?= Tempel , ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org Subject: Re: Use of supervise-daemon in Alpine Message-ID: <20200821191640.5238557d@ncopa-macbook.copa.dup.pw> In-Reply-To: References: <3LLUI2KOULSYM.359WA6HATX45B@8pit.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.6 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-alpine-linux-musl) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 20 Aug 2020 14:33:53 -0600 Ariadne Conill wrote: > Hello, >=20 > On 2020-08-20 11:04, S=C3=B6ren Tempel wrote: > > Hello, > >=20 > > OpenRC ships a program called supervise-daemon(8) which is capable of > > starting daemons and restarting them if they crash. Contrary to > > start-stop-daemon, it does not rely on PID files instead the started > > daemon is a child process of supervise-daemon. > >=20 > > Some Alpine OpenRC services already use supervise-daemon(8) (e.g. > > unbound, xdm, wpa_supplicant, =E2=80=A6). I was recently wondering if w= e want to > > migrate busybox-initscripts to using supervise-daemon too and was > > pointed to some comments in the GitLab issue tracker which critique use > > of supervise-daemon for busybox-initscripts because of concern over > > memory usage [0]. Upon further discussion in the IRC some people also > > expressed discomfort in regards to the automatic restarting of crashed > > services (=E2=80=9Cyou don't want to mask crashes=E2=80=9D). =20 >=20 > I would rather mask crashes than deal with a 3 AM phone call. As long=20 > as the crashes are logged (which supervise-daemon does), I don't see the= =20 > problem. I think many agree with you, but not everyone. So it should be configurable. -nc