| |||||||||||||
Poettering: The Biggest MythsPoettering: The Biggest MythsPosted Feb 1, 2013 8:13 UTC (Fri) by smurf (subscriber, #17840)In reply to: Poettering: The Biggest Myths by dlang Parent article: Poettering: The Biggest Myths
> why not just create a service launcher command that creates the cgroups as needed
The word "just" does not apply in this context.
The launcher would still need to tell systemd which cgroup and which main process has been created, so that systemd can take the correct action if/when the thing dies.
In fact, the launcher would have to be *started* from systemd, for the simple reason that you want your daemon to inherit a clean environment. Fixing it all up in a launcher or, worse, in each daemon you start (which is the current method) does not always work and requires additional privileges which you need to guard against being exploited.
Thus, there's no advantage to having a separate launcher, other than giving you a warm fuzzy feeling. Not sufficient to convince me, sorry.
(Log in to post comments)
Poettering: The Biggest Myths Posted Feb 1, 2013 11:15 UTC (Fri) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] Presumably, the »service launcher« isn't supposed to be used with systemd – the idea is to hang on to System V init a little longer by having a method to launch services with (some of) the features that systemd would otherwise offer, like per-service cgroups. In this context the fact that the demise of a service cannot be detected does not matter since System V init can't do it, either, and the proponents of System V init apparently consider this an overrated feature.
|
|||||||||||||