Re: stage4 of shutdown

Paul Sopka <[email protected]> Tue, 23 Dec 2025 08:54:43 +0100
Newsgroups gmane.comp.sysutils.supervision.general
Message-ID <aUpKw7QPWxVzIL8K@NANDERTY>
--gr6zQLsjfEaKDNDH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>   By definition, the s6-linux-init binaries have to reside on the root
> partition. That includes s6-linux-init-hpr. There is no reason to
> move that binary away.
>   The only s6-linux-init binary that would make sense to have on a
> different partition is s6-linux-init-maker, because it's not used at
> boot or shutdown time. You can package it that way if you want.
>   But s6-linux-init-hpr has to stay on the root partition. You *might*
> manage to make it work otherwise, but I think you'll find the trade-offs
> are just not worth it.
>
This is not a request to change s6-linux-init in any way.
I understand that it must reside on root and I am convinced that this is a =
good solution.
I am doing an experiment here, depending on the outcome of which
I might change my own scripts (also including an init script).
Thats why I am asking whether remounting read-only over umounting
would be feasable.

>   One of the differences between boot and shutdown is that when booting,
> you know exactly what state your machine is in, and what processes are
> running on it. But when shutting down, you don't. Even if (a) is true
> in the beginning, users can launch backgrounded nohup scripts that
> detach
> from their login session and evade control by any instance of
> s6-supervise. That is an entirely legitimate use of the machine's
> resources, you cannot forbid it. So you cannot rely on (a).
>
That was exactly what I was unsure about and the main reason
I came to ask here, thank you!

>   As is, a s6-linux-init shutdown, even with a normal grace period, is
> *much* faster than an OpenRC shutdown, and to my knowledge, a little
> faster than a systemd shutdown. I see no benefit in trying to make it
> even faster at the price of reliability.
>=20
I am not trying to make it faster, but to cut down on complexity,
I now understand that this specific complexity is really necessary.

Best regards,
Paul Sopka

--gr6zQLsjfEaKDNDH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=VJtu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--gr6zQLsjfEaKDNDH--