Tom Gundersen (2011-09-08 18:50): > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Am 08.09.2011 18:01, schrieb Tom Gundersen: > >> I think my preferred approach would be to provide some more > >> helperfunctions in /etc/rc.d/functions which do the most common > >> operations of the ones you outlined above. Just by glancing over your > >> ssh-patch I got the impression that we would be better off supporting > >> fewer options than start-stop-daemon does, to encourage unified/simple > >> rc scripts. Take --start as an example, we should probably have a > >> function that looks something like "start($pidfile,$executable,$args)" > > > > Agreed. > > > >> . How we implement these functions would be an internal detail of > >> initscripts (we could either include start-stop-daemon.c or we could > >> implement them in bash if it is simple enough). > > > > Clemens has a point here: Debian already sorted out all the kinks and > > quirks of this topic, and implemented the solution in > > start-stop-daemon.c. Instead of slowly converging towards their result > > (remaining buggy on the way), we would benefit from their work if our > > new helpers in rc.d/functions would simply call start-stop-daemon. > > Sure, I'd be happy with including start-stop-daemon in initscripts. I > don't want to just copy the C file though (like we did with minlog), > but pull the sources from whatever upstream is. And I think it makes > sense to keep it internal and not expose it to rc scripts as is (just > so we still have some control on what goes into our rc scripts), > unless someone can successfully argue that it is all awesome. Continuing the minilogd example, I think that if you decide to use it, start-stop-daemon shouldn't be bundled with initscripts, but should be a separate package (and it has 32 votes in AUR). -- -- Rogutės Sparnuotos
