Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 09:40:26 +0100 From: Outback Dingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com> To: grahamperrin <grahamperrin@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: relaunchd: a portable clone of launchd Message-ID: <CAKYr3zwmmZOz%2BoEiBsG1jdvs73aZ%2BgX1asQjbh8cp0=C%2BuVQRA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1452172449792-6065692.post@n5.nabble.com> References: <CAGfo=8nPxY6SW%2B04R4sN_a1udOuVRLEownM4p2Yz5Y8YGvheeA@mail.gmail.com> <F18891B6-5375-46DC-A781-3CA4B1C211DE@jeamland.net> <CAGfo=8=8Np_59AzMwzVS1abm=oJ6VzLuZH1H765s9-fF0SJ2zg@mail.gmail.com> <CAGwOe2ZXBcK2LtoqfjcuXQrOuU8xq9Q5FaHT_tO761r7exzG6g@mail.gmail.com> <8FF83C2F-D8CD-4366-A890-7EF605050456@netgate.com> <CAGfo=8=7ZYvnT4H2ELNCt1ZiUzietGex-X9VrNe9w7NOyvZxpw@mail.gmail.com> <1452172449792-6065692.post@n5.nabble.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:14 PM, grahamperrin <grahamperrin@gmail.com> wrote= : > I'm not a developer but I follow these discussions with interest. I'm a > former tester of OS X, in which launchd is (in my experience) very > satisfactory. > > > Mark Heily wrote > > Allow me to clarify the goals of relaunchd and how this affects the > > existing init(8) and rc(8) system in FreeBSD. > > > > Unlike the original launchd project, relaunchd is not trying to become > PID > > #1 or replace anything in the base system. I am simply asking for help > > getting it fixed up and committed to the ports tree, so it can become a= n > > alternative for people who want to configure their systems to take > > advantage of the featureset that launchd provides. Choice is good, and = I > > don't want to take away people's ability to use nosh, openrc, svc, or > > whatever else meets their needs. > > That seems reasonable. > > nosh caught my eye a couple of months ago. Some attention to PC-BSD was > apparent so I posted highlights under > https://forums.pcbsd.org/thread-20272.html =E2=80=A6 ending when I found = a section > on the nosh project within the FreeBSD 2015Q3 status report. > Everyone has and is entitled to their own opinions, and as such, those of us who have been involved in some of this have already reviewed the current technologies and the works in the past, that being said we have a difference of opinions on nosh and relaucnhd, of which have been reviewed heavily for merit on the basis of the works and technology by many people. Hashing this out and pointing to simple facts for myself and knowing the varied opinions of others, and has been expressed before. I find what has the most merit to date is the newer launchd project being done in NextBSD, even though in my own opinion, I would have preferred a non-mach implementation I can see the reasoning behind it. I cant quite grasp the reasoning for relaunchd itself, when there is already launchd_xml and the NextBSD launchd. However, the same with such as openrc, it does work quite well on FreeBSD. What i find troubling is the "fracture" with so many efforts in other directions, instead of a single effort in one direction. And the long term adoption of one of these efforts. Just because its been written about, doesnt mean that theres is even an interest. > > Re: the third call for 2015Q4 quarterly status reports > < > http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/second-call-for-2015Q4-quarterly-sta= tus-reports-tp6063452p6064992.html > >: > > * the deadline for submissions is today > > =E2=80=93 if it's not too late, I wonder whether something submitted *now= * could > help the report, when it appears, to put things in context without causin= g > unnecessary alarm. An explanation of how developments in both project are= as > (nosh and relaunchd) may be complementary. > > > > I will try to develop relaunchd in such a way that it *could* be used t= o > > replace rc(8) if desired, but that would require a lot of work and > > discussion and buy-in from the FreeBSD project leadership. Because > > relaunchd is such a young project, I want to have more realistic goals > and > > not worry about what might happen in the longer term. I would consider = it > > a major success if, a year from now, the majority of the daemons in the > > ports tree offer support for running under launchd(8) in addition to th= e > > traditional rc(8) init scripts. > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/relaunchd-a-portable-clone-of-launch= d-tp6053155p6065692.html > Sent from the freebsd-hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAKYr3zwmmZOz%2BoEiBsG1jdvs73aZ%2BgX1asQjbh8cp0=C%2BuVQRA>