reacting to respawn giving up?

Scott James Remnant scott at
Thu Dec 3 15:23:40 GMT 2009

On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 16:25 +0200, Janne Karhunen wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Scott James Remnant <scott at> wrote:
> > I've deliberately omitted this functionality for now, because it's far,
> > far more complex than just adding a setuid() call to the child process.
> >
> > Things like PAM sessions, users being able to start/stop their own jobs,
> > etc. all come into play.
> Hmm, some sort of basic draft attached. Any pointers where
> this goes wrong?
Yes, it doesn't address the difference between a setuid process and
running a process "as a user" (which suggests a full PAM session).

Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : 

More information about the upstart-devel mailing list