reacting to respawn giving up?

[Scott James Remnant]

On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 18:18 +0200, Janne Karhunen wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Scott James Remnant <scott at netsplit.com> wrote:
> 
> >> > 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).
> 
> Fair enough. Would you be fine with it if we separate
> that as two stanzas - setuid and the user one with full
> PAM support?
> 
Yes, but I don't want to introduce one without the other.

Scott
-- 
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 : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/upstart-devel/attachments/20091203/deda6968/attachment-0001.pgp