Nils Philippsen <nphilipp@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > 1. process 1 (p1) prepares the service > 2. when finished, p1 forks p2 which will be the long-runner, controlling > any eventual children > 3. p1 exits > > This seems to be a standard procedure for self-detaching daemons to > me. That's the old forking-daemon way. Most modern initsystems work best with non-forking daemons. > I've often had to chain multiple of these to get the desired results -- > but that's more a matter of convenience (perhaps my bash is just too > rusty and it can be done more elegantly). What matters more to me (this > came to mind only yesterday while driving home) is that if you do: > > cat $somefile | while read line; do ... done > > variables set in the while loop have no effect outside of it, or if you this effect is known and this example can be written as | while read line ... done < $somefile But we are speaking about preparation scripts of daemons. Do you really need such tasks there? > except OSError, e: > # clean up OS error > ... > except SomeException, e: > # do something else > sys.stderr.print "Warning: doing foo failed, continuing (%s)" % str (e) > except: > # panic! > sys.stderr.print "Error: %s" % str(e) > sys.exit (42) > > I don't know if any of this is necessary for init code, but these are > some things that I miss or find cumbersome in shell. I do not say that shell shall be used for everything. I just say that python is not an option for any part of sysinit which should be written completely in C. (ba)sh plus usual POSIX/GNU tools are the optimal choice for preparation tasks, but these are no deps of the sysinit system itself but of the specific daemon. Enrico -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
