Re: [PATCH 1/3] correct typo

From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 09:20:53 -0400

On Tue 2016-08-30 07:15:20 -0400, Laurent Bercot wrote:
> Oh, yes, sorry, you even wrote a message (about a listen(1) command)
> not too long ago :)

Yes, indeed. That program is now halfway done, and i am hoping to share
it with people who might be interested.

> (Shameless plug: in the meantime, you could take a look at runit's
> cousin, s6. ;))

i assume you mean . thanks for the
pointer. I'm looking at that, and it looks like s6's preferred form of
user contact is via github (i've just submitted a trivial pull request).

It doesn't seem to do what i'm proposing with listen(8), though, and
listen doesn't quite fit there. For one thing, the socket activation it
provides doesn't seem to provide for any shared state between concurrent
connections without using the filesystem. Maybe that's a plus, but i
don't know of many daemons built to work that way -- they often have
shared state directly in RAM, where it's arguably more straightforward
to synchronize complex data structures (i'm sure you could do something
clever with mmapped files and/or ipc, but i'd have to think about the
locking/synchronization stuff there a lot more).

Anyway, thanks for the pointers. it looks to me like my proposed
listen(8) seems to bridge the gap between the daemontools family and the
standard daemons that people will want to deploy (which are being
updated for systemd) slightly more closely with runit than with s6, but
if you're interested in thinking that kind of gap-bridging through with
me, i'm certainly interested.



Received on Tue Aug 30 2016 - 13:20:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun May 09 2021 - 19:44:19 UTC