Hello Steve. Thank you! I totally get the frustration behind emotions like the ones showed. The whole Systemd debate frustrated me to no end. It is human. So all forgiven and forgotten.
Steve Litt - 16.11.17, 12:31: > > > #3 is, in my opinion, practical. Any fool can write a run script > > > with environment variables: Even I can do it. In most cases, a > > > daemon doesn't care whether it's started by the main init system, or > > > indirectly by a supervisor started by the main init system. Like #2, > > > this helps give Devuan a unique brand. Also, this future-proofs us: > > > When Debian drags their feet in putting forth a sysvinit init > > > script, a Devuan volunteer can step forward with a supervisor run > > > script. Over a period of time, more and more daemons in Devuan > > > could be run from a single supervisor process. > > > > > > So then the question becomes, what supervisor? Runit? S6? > > > Daemontools-encore? Perp? > > > > FWIW the last /etc/init.d/skeleton script in Debian already has all > > the common functions in some kind of shell script library and a new > > init script without any extra handling would not be more than setting > > the 3-4 environment variables there. Additionally one could overwrite > > just one function like "do_start" with own code. > > The preceding paragraph is a nice alternative. Devuan should take > advantage of it, but I don't think it should be the sole alternative. I > think that supporting one or two supervisors, which wouldn't be > particularly hard, would provide an excellent Plan-B, and would fortify > us in case something went REALLY wrong with Debian's support of > sysvinit. I totally agree with you. > Ask anybody who has run a supervisor: Doing so is a breath of fresh > air. It's easy. It's easy to incorporate other peoples' daemons. It's > trivially easy to incorporate your own daemon, because if you use a > supervisor daemons are just ordinary foreground programs that you write > a separate 6 line run script for. I do think that it is wise to replace SysVinit at some point or at least provide an alternative. I even agree with tech-ctte decision regarding replacing SysVinit, that is not the point. Systemd addressed a need. Yet it went to far, it is too many in one, attitude of at least some upstream developers appear to be toxic to me and so on… and it was not the only viable option… we all know the arguments, no need to repeat, … so a good daemon / service supervisor as one modular building block perfectly fine with me. I would not know which one, so far I did not dig deeper into them. But as long as there are maintainers it does not have to be just one. Thank you, -- Martin _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
