On Mon, 23.02.15 11:30, Max ([email protected]) wrote: > Hi. > > I've got question partially inspired by recent posts to this ML from some > troll > without shift on his keyboard :) > > It's been mentioned that calls like sd_listen_fds(0) and others become NOOP > when > socket activation is not available due to lack of systemd. Which is fine but > leads to > rather inflated code as in here: > http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/socket-activation.html > > Is there some wrapper library which hides this boilerplate from developers? > > I mean instead of writing every time code like > > if (sd_listen_fds(0) > 1) { > ... // error > } else if (n == 1) > ... // systemd OK > else { > ... // fallback to legacy > } > > > I'd really prefer to use something like: > > int fd = listen_on_fd_with_or_without_systemd(...); > > which effectively incorporates all the fallback-to-legacy logic. > > The same question, naturally, applies to non-scocket-activation daemons. > > I've tried to search for it but unfortunately came up with nothing so I'd > appreciate > links to such projects or to documentation which would explain why this kind > of > wrapper is really stupid idea :)
For testing purposes we do provide the "systemd-activate" tool to run socket activated daemons without socket activation. I am not really sure thought whether we should provide more than that. The thing is simply that I cannot see how an API we would provide could be any simpler than the BSD socket API is on its own. If you want to listen on something, you need socket(), maybe a couple of setsockopt()s, a bind() and a listen(). Any API that would wrap that would kinda need the same amount of function calls, hence wouldn't be any shorter or easier with it... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
