On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Lucas De Marchi <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jukka, > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Jukka Rissanen > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Lucas, >> >> On 11 July 2012 18:23, Lucas De Marchi <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Letting systemd daemonize connmand, as we are already doing, there's no >>> need to have an option "-n" since it will work for both debugging and >>> running it as a daemon. Therefore, just remove the option. >>> >>> Other init systems may use whatever method they have to turn connmand into a >>> daemon. >> >> You are breaking an API by removing an option, now connman will not >> start if user supplies -n option. > > humn? Command line parameters are part of an API? > > We provide script to start with systemd, and that is updated as well. > >> >> Anyway, I do not see much point removing functionality that is useful >> when systemd is not being used. So NACK from me. > > The point here is simplification... there's no point in dealing with > this today - whatever init is starting connmand can turn it into a > daemon. And if doesn't have native support for this (I really hope all > init implementations have), it could use helper programs.
Marcel keeps saying he wants to just support systemd systems, then this would make sense. But really, if you do so you can remove the detaching code, not just the option... and more, seems systemd is getting (or got?) backtracing support so it could do the coredump storage and reporting outside of connman. -- Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri http://profusion.mobi embedded systems -------------------------------------- MSN: [email protected] Skype: gsbarbieri Mobile: +55 (19) 9225-2202 _______________________________________________ connman mailing list [email protected] http://lists.connman.net/listinfo/connman
