Re: [dev] A replacement for at.

From: Mattias Andrée <>
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2016 22:13:46 +0100

On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 10:19:01 +0100
Mattias Andrée <> wrote:

> Hi!
> I'm written an alternative to at, called sat (for simple
> at): sat is incompatible
> with at, but I have tried to make sure that a
> compatibility-layer can be written.
> sat is basically at without a lot of features that does
> not need to be there. sat is also written to waste very
> little memory when it is inactive — since it is almost
> always inactive — fork–exec:s, libexec:s to do things when
> something happens.
> satd is an unprivileged daemon that is user-private, and
> starts and exits automatically. The client programs (sat,
> satq, satr, satrm) communicates with satd using a domain
> socket. Unfortunately message queues (or bus:
> was a not a good option
> because of unbounded message lengths.
> satd is able to update online, and is able to recover its
> job queue if its shuts down unexpectedly.
> I have released sat under the terms of the MIT License,
> in hope that it will be useful if you want to base your
> at-implement of it.
> Mattias Andrée

I am rewritting it so that it will only use signals
and flock for interprocess communication.

Received on Fri Jan 01 2016 - 22:13:46 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Jan 01 2016 - 22:24:10 CET