[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: /hurd/init and /hurd/proc
From: |
Samuel Thibault |
Subject: |
Re: /hurd/init and /hurd/proc |
Date: |
Mon, 15 Jul 2013 10:56:25 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21+34 (58baf7c9f32f) (2010-12-30) |
Justus Winter, le Tue 25 Jun 2013 17:47:49 +0200, a écrit :
> This special interface they both use and the fact that init does lot's
> of process related things might be an indication that the seperation
> does more harm than good. It seems to make the code more complex, and
> fixing the issue of killing essential processes will probably involve
> adding more specialized messages that are only used by those two
> processes. Is there a benefit of having them separated?
I don't see a benefit either, particularly given when we would use
sysvinit's init for unix init tasks. Anybody?
> About the pid 1 issue, I thought about patching the proc server to
> reserve pid 1 for sysvinit and just make our init pid 4 or
> something. Pino mentioned something about hardcoded assumptions of
> which hurd server has which pid. Where would I find such assumptions
> documented? Or could you provide anything from the top of your head?
I don't think it's written anywhere except in people's debug.txt file,
so changing it wouldn't harm.
Samuel
- Re: /hurd/init and /hurd/proc,
Samuel Thibault <=
- Re: /hurd/init and /hurd/proc, Roland McGrath, 2013/07/15
- kill (0, SIGSTOP) is freezing the system (was: /hurd/init and /hurd/proc), Justus Winter, 2013/07/24
- [PATCH 2/7] hurd: add proc_mark_essential, Justus Winter, 2013/07/24
- [PATCH 1/7] proc: add proc_mark_essential server code, Justus Winter, 2013/07/24
- [PATCH 4/7] init: Build fixes, Justus Winter, 2013/07/24
- [PATCH 3/7] init: Mark auth, proc and fs servers as essential, Justus Winter, 2013/07/24
- [PATCH 6/7] proc: evil hack, mark all pids<100 essential, Justus Winter, 2013/07/24
- [PATCH 5/7] proc: Fix miscalculation of count, Justus Winter, 2013/07/24