I am not denying nxinit, so I have not added any comments in the apps repository. All my comments here are about discussing how nxinit should be implemented, rather than rejecting the merging of this PR. I don't understand why there was such an intense reaction during the discussion, even to the extent of closing the PR. nxinit provides system service monitoring capabilities, which were missing from the previous startup scripts. However, I believe we need to be cautious if nxinit is to be integrated into the nuttx kernel, for the following two reasons:
1. nxinit will cause the system to support two sets of script syntax: android init and nuttx shell. 2. If developers of nsh want to use the service daemon capability, they need to replace the initialization entry, and the code previously in the nuttx init script cannot be used continuously. Whether to enhance the existing system implementation or create a new set of implementations, the choice is yours. BRs, raiden00pl <[email protected]> 于2025年10月28日周二 20:03写道： > nuttx-apps has always been a collection of useful applications and libs for > users. Nothing in this repo is mandatory, it's completely optional. I don't > see > any reason why we should give up from nxinit in nuttx-apps. What's more, I > see > this as a big loss for the project. > > Having a repository like nuttx-apps is a big advantage of NuttX. This gives > us more freedom in what we can keep there than if the apps were part of > the nuttx kernel repo. So we don't have to look for a perfect solution, > which probably doesn't exist anyway. > > wt., 28 paź 2025 o 12:20 Michał Łyszczek <[email protected]> > napisał(a): > > > On 2025-10-28 11:54:33, Sebastien Lorquet wrote: > > > > > The nuttx-apps directory already contains many apps whose value is much > > more > > > dubious/discussable than this nxinit thing. > > > > > > Following these events Xiao Xiang got understandably fed up and has > > > retracted all pull requests related to this project. > > > > > > I wonder what is the opinion of the community about this issue. > > > > > > Should we vote about the integration of this new app? > > > > I'd say nuttx-apps should be treated like package/ dir in buildroot. You > > want an app that is useful to you? You just prepare make file and kconfig > > to > > integrate it and push it. If code is not in nuttx repo, that is Makefile > > just downloads .tar.gz from the net and unpacks it - it doesn't even have > > to > > follow nuttx code convention. > > > > I myself have added few apps like that. App only contains Makefile and > > Kconfig > > and code is downloaded from the internet. There was never any problem > with > > pushing such apps. And I believe I am the only person that uses them :) > > > > So in my opinion, that nxinit should be totally allowed to be added to > > apps. > > It's useful to someone. It's 100% optional. It's not default. It does not > > break > > anything. Hence it should be added without any votes as long as it > follows > > the > > rules. Even if such app benefits only a single person. > > >
