I just backported these fixes to my system and found no more issues, thanks!
On s6-instance-update, as a user I'd expect it to exist and be run
automatically as part of s6-rc-update. Since restarting applies the
new definition for longruns, having to do one extra step (or two if
s6-instance-update isn't made) per instance of a templated longrun
would be counterintuitive.
I do understand it'd make s6-rc-update (arguably the most brittle
program in s6-rc) even more brittle, though.
Em qua., 1 de fev. de 2023 às 02:32, Laurent Bercot
<ska-skaware_at_skarnet.org> escreveu:
>
>
> >Agree on avoiding restarting old instances. If instances were atomic
> >services, s6-rc-update wouldn't restart them either.
> >
> >OTOH, the template's files are copied, not symlinked, which means
> >restarting old instances will use the old template. Does this call for
> >an s6-instance-update program?
>
> The fix I currently have in git does exactly that: instances are now
> correctly transmitted across s6-rc-update, and not restarted; the new
> template is copied, but it's not copied to existing instances, it will
> only be used for new ones. To get the new template on an existing
> instance, you need s6-instance-delete + s6-instance-create.
>
> There may indeed be some value to an s6-instance-update program that
> would provide a new template to an existing instance, with an option
> to immediately restart the instance or not. I'll think about it some
> more,
> inputs welcome.
>
> --
> Laurent
>
Received on Sat Feb 04 2023 - 03:46:18 CET