systemd: please stop trying to take over the world :)

[mike cloaked]

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 16:11 +0200, Michal Schmidt wrote:
>> On 06/10/2011 03:59 PM, Steve Clark wrote:
>> > On 06/10/2011 09:36 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
>> >> systemd does not take the system down when it crashes. It catches the
>> >> signal, dumps core and freezes, but does not exit.
>> >>                         ^^^^^^^
>> > So you just end up with a "froze" system instead of a crashed system????
>>
>> No, only systemd freezes itself. Other processes continue running.
>
> systemd-26/src/main.c::crash() is the function which does it.
> Assuming it will not recurse by crashing again, of course. It calls
> log_error and assert_se, which go into log_dispatch(), which logs to
> syslog, may try to write to klog, and whatnot... this doesn't look
> too robust to me.
>
> But anyway. Assuming it successfully froze. Does it help?
> Yes. How much? Well, it's better than instant oops which happens
> when PID 1 exits, but reaping of processes reparented
> to init will stop, which, for example, makes the hang from pid
> exhaustion just a question of time.
>
> Ultimately, this stems from the decision to make systemd
> to run as PID 1 process. Are there technical reasons for this?
>

Would be nice to see the systemd author join this discussion?
-- 
mike c