Re: [atomic-devel] Has anyone considered packaging dumb-init or tini for use in Fedora/CentOS/RHEL?

[Eric Paris <eparis redhat com>]

On Mon, 2017-03-06 at 21:22 -0500, Clayton Coleman wrote:
> They'd be really helpful for cases where you don't want full blown
> systemd, but want a long running container that needs to reap
> processes.  I don't know that one or the other matters, I have a
> slight bias for dumb-init in terms of signal rewriting (a few cases
> might need that).
> 
> Anyone using these today?

What does dumb-init or tini get me that systemd doesn't?