lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Kernel 2.2.1 and sysvinit 2.76 possible bug
    On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Alan Cox wrote:

    > > 2.2 introduces a "feature" which causes the kernel to reboot if init
    > > dies for any reason, so it is more likely that sysvinit could be the
    > > culprit. However, I agree with you; this is a kernel bug and should
    > > be fixed.
    >
    > Its not a bug. If init dies the machine is in deep crap. Init should not
    > die. If init dies something very bad has occured. Simply carrying on with
    > no pid 1 to reap processes wont work very well

    I see. So tanking the whole unit is better. That way, if no one is
    around, they won't even notice there is a problem (unless they check uptime
    and/or read their logs carefully). Step back for a moment and think of it
    this way: is it the kernel's responsibility to decide what is best for the
    user WRT user-space? Sounds more like some operating systems we don't like
    to emulate very much. ;)

    Seriously, I agree that losing init is going to cause Big Grief, and is an
    unrecoverable situation. But perhaps the user wishes to preserve some
    flexibility as to how to proceed in this dire situation (ie. an opportunity
    to carry out some other task perhaps, before cycling). I would suggest
    that the behavior on loss of init be a toggleable /proc/sys/kernel switch.

    -bp
    --
    B. James Phillippe . bryan@terran.org
    Software Engineer, WGT Inc. . http://www.terran.org/~bryan


    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:50    [W:0.020 / U:2.820 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site