What is better with events? Are there really a need for them? And do you mean to write a now format for the scripts or stay with shellscript? Anyway, I can't see a need for events right now if that means to totally ditch service_file and start all over again. That would just be crazy. We need something that works today and not next month or next year or something. Why exactly are events better than the current stuff?
Greets Jens Ismael Luceno wrote: > The Problem > =========== > I really liked the idea of sfiles, but events simply screws up all. > > I mean, we don't have a way to handle events on sfiles, and all the > current functionality can be represented as events... > > What should we do about this? > > > Implementation > ============== > First, we need to define a protocol for external events. > > This will be the only interface available to any process outside of > initng. So that means it will be used by everything, even by ngc. > > I think it should be really simple. > > So it should be defined as something like: > > char **extern_event; > > In which each item has the form "name=val". > > > Transmission > ============ > The array can be passed to event subscribers as env[]. > It also can be transmitted to/from initng as plain text, one item per > line. > > So we could have something like: > > event=start > service=daemon/agetty > > or > > event=mount > device=/dev/sda3 > dir=/tmp > > > Internal/External event translation > =================================== > External events may produce internal events, and vice versa. > > Event translation will be handled by functions registered in the > event_type. > > To avoid loops, a "origin" flag should be placed in s_event, to > mark it as internal/external. > > > -- _______________________________________________ Initng mailing list [email protected] http://jw.dyndns.org/mailman/listinfo/initng
