| 1 |
Is this effectively a new system of init-scripts? |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
If so.. I think it'd be cool to write some bsd-style init-scripts to add |
| 4 |
to the variety. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 21:11:12 +0000 |
| 7 |
"Hallgrimur H. Gunnarsson" <hhg@××××.is> wrote: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Hello friends ! |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I'd like to propose a new USE flag. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> On my systems I've added a 'daemontools' USE flag |
| 14 |
> as an alternative to the current init.d for |
| 15 |
> service management. To be a true metadistribution, |
| 16 |
> it doesn't seem fair to let init.d have a monopoly |
| 17 |
> on providing service management for packages. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> For those who haven't heard of it before, daemontools |
| 20 |
> is a process supervisor that can manage services. |
| 21 |
> For more information see http://cr.yp.to/daemontools.html |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Integration of this functionality into ebuilds is in |
| 24 |
> most cases very trivial. Packages that wish to |
| 25 |
> provide daemontools USE flag support provide |
| 26 |
> a 'run' file, that is copied to a service directory, |
| 27 |
> /etc/daemontools/servicename, or something in that |
| 28 |
> direction. We could even have some automated facility |
| 29 |
> for preparing service directories. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> People can then choose what to use for running a particular |
| 32 |
> service, /etc/init.d or linking the service directory into |
| 33 |
> /service if the package provides daemontools support. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> I've opened a bug for this (#28294), so what do people |
| 36 |
> think of this? |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> -- hhg |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> -- |
| 42 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives