On 2014-08-11, Rich Freeman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Grant Edwards
><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Any advice on whether it would be easier to use a common init script
>> with sysV/OpenRC/systemd or to write a separate .service file?
>
> I'd almost certainly generate a proper unit, and not try to use a
> compatibility mode, especially if you're generating these using
> software.
It wouldn't be generated by software. Both the sysv init script and
.service file would be maintained by hand.
> If anything it would make more sense to make a sysvinit script which
> is a wrapper for a systemd unit than the other way around.
Thanks, I'll consider that, but I'm reluctant to do so for fear of
breaking compatibility with various ancient systems in use out there.
[I can't even find hardware old enough to run some of the Linux
kernels and distro's some customers are still using.]
[...]
> Most daemons will be fairly similar to this, though a daemon which
> forks will be slightly different (type=forking, and will have a
> PIDfile setting).
The daemon is currently of the traditional forking variety with a PID
file, so it should lend itself to Type=forking PIDFile=/var/run/whatever.pid.
But, there are a number of housekeeping tasks that are performed
before starting the daemon and after terminating the daemon (checking
configuration files, verifying presence of kernel module .ko/.o files,
loading a kernel module and logging some pertinent info from that
module, unloading the kernel module, etc.). It looks like I should
write ExecStartPre and ExecStopPost scripts for systemd to invoke.
One thing I'm still wondering about is the canonical location to
install things like ExecStartPre and ExecStopPost scripts.
I could modify the daemon to provide a "no-fork" option and then exec
it at the end of a startup script, but I don't really see much benefit
to that.
> This one is a bit fancy in that it has a post-exec script/program
> that just checks for the main service to be ready (so that reverse
> dependencies aren't started prematurely).
>
> It is important that whatever is in execstart doesn't die if this is
> a daemon. If this is just going to modprobe something and terminate
> that is fine, but there is a slightly different way to express those
> so that it isn't considered a failure.
Thanks much for the advice.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! I am covered with
at pure vegetable oil and I am
gmail.com writing a best seller!
