| 1 |
I'd like to get more thoughts on this. Should it share code with |
| 2 |
OpenRC (that's what makes init.d scripts work, right?), or be a |
| 3 |
completely separate program? If it's a new program, should it use the |
| 4 |
same init.d "standard"? I was also thinking of inter-user |
| 5 |
dependencies, where system init.d scripts can depend on user init.d |
| 6 |
scripts, and, if the other users allows this, users can depend others' |
| 7 |
init.d scripts. Would such possibilities be useful? What about root |
| 8 |
not allowing users to create new init.d scripts, but only launch an |
| 9 |
existing one on their behalf (ie., root gives you a list of daemons |
| 10 |
you can launch, but you cannot create your own)? I guess the |
| 11 |
configuration files should be based on Bash (especially considering |
| 12 |
some env variables could be useful)? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Thanks in advance for all your ideas, |
| 15 |
tulcod. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Auke Booij <auke@××××××.com> wrote: |
| 18 |
> 2. Per-user daemons. Currently, there are some daemons, like |
| 19 |
> PulseAudio, jackd, several download daemons, and soon possibly X.org |
| 20 |
> (which will no longer need to run as root, and really should run as a |
| 21 |
> normal user), which run as specific users, instead of root or a |
| 22 |
> systemwide daemon-specific user. There is currently no framework for |
| 23 |
> launching these daemons at all, and the current solution is to either |
| 24 |
> make users figure out their own solution (a popular one is an extra |
| 25 |
> line in .xinitrc), or to set the username in some conf.d file, thus |
| 26 |
> disabling the possibility to run several of them for different users. |
| 27 |
> I would like to develop an extension to our current init.d system |
| 28 |
> which will enable users to write and start their own init scripts, |
| 29 |
> which at first only run as themselves, not as another user. This would |
| 30 |
> make it possible to cleanly launch several identical daemons for |
| 31 |
> several users. This project would involve either writing a new |
| 32 |
> additional init.d system, or extend our current system. I would like |
| 33 |
> to know 1. if you guys are understanding a word of what I'm saying at |
| 34 |
> all 2. if this would be an interesting idea (I think it is, of course) |
| 35 |
> 3. anyone has any ideas or would like to mentor me. |
Archives