Re: Native upstart scripts
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Jacek Konieczny jaj...@jajcus.net wrote: Hello, In PLD Th, we have upstart as the /sbin/init daemon for some time, but it is only used to start the old 'SysVinit' scripts from /etc/rc.d/init.d. To make full use of Upstart features, like process supervising, parallel start, etc. we should find a way to include Upstart support in our packages. Though, we should not replace the current, working solution. BTW: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html -- Patryk Zawadzki ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Native upstart scripts
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 11:20:30AM +0200, Patryk Zawadzki wrote: On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Jacek Konieczny jaj...@jajcus.net wrote: In PLD Th, we have upstart as the /sbin/init daemon for some time, but it is only used to start the old 'SysVinit' scripts from /etc/rc.d/init.d. To make full use of Upstart features, like process supervising, parallel start, etc. we should find a way to include Upstart support in our packages. Though, we should not replace the current, working solution. BTW: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html Great. This fixes some problems of Upstart… but… This would look great to me if I haven't seen several other „great SysVinit replacements”. All of them were much better than SysVinit and even had some „working implementations”. Often long before the Upstart came up. And everybody have been still using SysVinit. Upstart is the only one which caught on. It is terrible, with its big incompatibilities between each version… poor documentation (at least on the web), impractical event system. Nevertheless it is still much better than SysVinit with the pile of shell scripts starting daemons doing anything not to be managed (double-forking, etc.). Unfortunately /sbin/init is so critical, that we cannot even experiment much, especially with something no one else uses. And it is hard to have multiple /sbin/init implementation side by side in one distribution. They all differ too much not only in the configuration file formats but in the whole philosophy of the configuration (not only „how to describe a service configuration” but even „what is a service configuration”). One could think of making some kind of an abstraction layer, like our rc-inetd, but that is a very bad idea. We would probably lose most of the advantages of each init implementation then. We should rather think how can we provided a few very different configuration items, each for a different init implementation, with one package. I am losing my enthusiasm about implementing the „native upstart support” in PLD when I think systemd may eventually mature enough and we would need to start from the beginning… And I need a good init system now. Currently I use SysVinit + daemontools in my PLD-based project. It generally works, but is not elegant nor optimal. Even upstart, when properly deployed, would be better and systemd could be much better, but I guess it is a matter of future. Pozdrowienia, Jacek ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Native upstart scripts
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 07:40:43PM +0300, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: i don't like the idea that the links are managed via some script, i'd like easily to boot to upstart-mode or sysvinit-mode with a kernel commandline, or something in /etc/sysconfig/system the both solutions should be available and configured at the same time. I thought about that and cannot see how it could be implemented. When there are upstart configs for some services then Upstart will start them by the dependencies inside and I cannot see a way to stop this from a kernel command line and still have the flexibility of which services should be handled by Upstart and which the old way. Greets, Jacek ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Native upstart scripts
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Patryk Zawadzki pat...@pld-linux.org wrote: On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Jacek Konieczny jaj...@jajcus.net wrote: Hello, In PLD Th, we have upstart as the /sbin/init daemon for some time, but it is only used to start the old 'SysVinit' scripts from /etc/rc.d/init.d. To make full use of Upstart features, like process supervising, parallel start, etc. we should find a way to include Upstart support in our packages. Though, we should not replace the current, working solution. BTW: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html Well, after seeing how many people have weird problems with PulseAudio I would be cautious about using another thing thought out by Lennart... -- Łukasz [DeeJay1] Jernaś ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Native upstart scripts
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Łukasz Jernaś deej...@srem.org wrote: Well, after seeing how many people have weird problems with PulseAudio I would be cautious about using another thing thought out by Lennart... To be fair you have to admit that a vast number of the problems experienced while using pulseaudio are actually bugs in kernel audio modules and/or alsa API abuse (think opal, ekiga etc.). -- Patryk Zawadzki ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Native upstart scripts
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 02:13:51PM +0200, Patryk Zawadzki wrote: On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Łukasz Jernaś deej...@srem.org wrote: Well, after seeing how many people have weird problems with PulseAudio I would be cautious about using another thing thought out by Lennart... To be fair you have to admit that a vast number of the problems experienced while using pulseaudio are actually bugs in kernel audio modules and/or alsa API abuse (think opal, ekiga etc.). I would rather say it is because of putting another audio server where it is not needed at all. ALSA alone does its job well enough nowadays (and if it does not, it should be fixed not wrapped with another layer). Fortunately things have not gone too far yet and a system without PulseAudio can still be set up (there was no such freedom in the dark ages of ESD and ARTS). This /sbin/init things are not that easy. We will always need some init daemon… though I still won't chose an implementation only basing on the fact that the idea is great. It must work and be maintained (or at least stable as SysVinit) too. Greets, Jacek ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Native upstart scripts
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Jacek Konieczny jaj...@jajcus.net wrote: I would rather say it is because of putting another audio server where it is not needed at all. ALSA alone does its job well enough nowadays (and if it does not, it should be fixed not wrapped with another layer). Fortunately things have not gone too far yet and a system without PulseAudio can still be set up (there was no such freedom in the dark ages of ESD and ARTS). I'd say alsa has nothing to search in the userspace and should just expose hardware. It should not try to provide smart mixing, store per-application volume or decide which channels to mute when a voip connection is established. That's pulseaudio's work. This /sbin/init things are not that easy. We will always need some init daemon… though I still won't chose an implementation only basing on the fact that the idea is great. It must work and be maintained (or at least stable as SysVinit) too. Notice I only mentioned systemd as by the way. I did not even think about packaging it at this point in time. -- Patryk Zawadzki ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Native upstart scripts
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 03:48:18PM +0200, Patryk Zawadzki wrote: This /sbin/init things are not that easy. We will always need some init daemon… though I still won't chose an implementation only basing on the fact that the idea is great. It must work and be maintained (or at least stable as SysVinit) too. Notice I only mentioned systemd as by the way. I did not even think about packaging it at this point in time. Yes, but knowing it „by the way” means we can consider it as a future option when changing rc-scripts for Upstart, so we don't have to revert some silly changes in the far future. Greets, Jacek ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
