Bug#590892: <interactive> not honored on shutdown, sindsigs not interactive

[Dmitry Bogatov]

control: tags -1 +moreinfo

[2011-08-17 20:57] Adi Kriegisch <kriegisch at vrvis.at>
> That is why I think it is futile to register the pid of 'umount -a -t
> ocfs2' within an omit file. And that is why I still (at least partly) think
> that there should be some kind of 'X-Exclusive' for system shutdown in
> insserv: because sendsigs might kill commands executed by other init
> scripts that might run a little longer for some reaon.

I thing we already have everything needed.  Essentially, insserv
impements topological sorting, both on start sequence and stop sequence.

 On start, if "foo" has "Should-Start: bar", it means that "foo" will be
 started /after/ "bar".

 On start, if "foo" has "X-Start-Before: bar", it means that "foo" will
 be started /before/ "bar".

 On stop, if "foo" has "Should-Stop: bar", then "foo" is stopped /before/
 "bar".

 On stop, if "foo" has "X-Stop-After: bar", then "foo" is stoppend
 /after/ "bar"

So, any init script can specify arbitrary relations (before, after,
irrelevant) with any other script. So, to make sure that your script is
never executed parallel to some other, you have to use one of first two
relations and one of last two.

On other hand, we already have X-Interactive, which, strictly speaking,
is not in basis (it can be expressed in terms of Should-Start and
X-Start-Before).

Jess, how much complexity would it be to implement X-Exclusive (or reusing
X-Interactive for stop sequence)?
-- 
Note, that I send and fetch email in batch, once in a few days.
Please, mention in body of your reply when you add or remove recepients.