On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Luca Bruno <lethalma...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 22/08/2014 17:28, Nicolas Pierron wrote: >> I am just saying, that I do not see why we could not use the jobs >> syntax on top of a string-dependency system which is used by the >> activation script. Systemd solves job dependencies dynamically to >> benefit from the kernel scheduling, while the activation scripts are >> concatenated ahead to make a single & simple activation process. I >> think there is no need to ""always"" bring the complexity of systemd >> to the init process, this could be optional. What I suggest is to have >> a 2 backends for the init process. The systemd one, and the >> string-dependency one. Of course, the string-dependency backend would >> have to assert (while building the system) about cases which cannot be >> handled. > So you want to parse systemd nixos modules in a restricted mode and > concatenate them? Yes, that makes sense.
Not parsing, just providing a different way to handle the submodule options. -- Nicolas Pierron http://www.linkedin.com/in/nicolasbpierron - http://nbp.name/ _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list nix-dev@lists.science.uu.nl http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
