On Nov 25, 2007 8:24 PM, Ismael Luceno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > El Thu, 22 Nov 2007 04:08:31 -0200 > Ismael Luceno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> Look at the following document: > http://ismael.linuxdevel.net/init_issues.html I notice something, as Upstart implements sysV init, it does really support runlevels. It is just that Ubuntu (and Debian) don't make use of them in any way, but the admin can if they understand how to manage the rc?.d hierarchy. Think about it, how can you be sysv compatabile, if you don't support runlevels? Was interested to see some of docs for "Policy Kit" at freedesktop.org, which uses XML to define fine grained privilege escalation (kind of like a sudo, that can integrate with GUI as well as command line). The architecture of it appears to be of interest, as has some analogy to Upstart issues with integration to GUI managament programs as well as command line. To me the real main problem, is not merely starting daemons, but actually cleaning up the configuration, and the interactions between packages which tend to attempt in scripts (to drive other packages) in fragile ways. Without come underlying concept to deal with these messy realities, SyS V scripts will most likely continue to be preferred by application packagers, and Upstart will introduce yet another alternative way of doing things for sys admins to learn. Sometimes, daemons are started via SyS V init, but often the scripts are actually configuring the system in some way, and in Ubuntu especially, you end up chasing through lots of little programs, trying to trace the interactions of the particular packages you installed. Table based configuration is much clearer, as there's no ordering dependencies. -- _______________________________________________ Initng mailing list [email protected] http://jw.dyndns.org/mailman/listinfo/initng
