[arch-general] Adopting start-stop-daemon in archlinux

C Anthony Risinger anthony at xtfx.me
Thu Sep 8 10:55:22 EDT 2011

On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Ray Rashif <schiv at archlinux.org> wrote:
> On 8 September 2011 19:35, Alessio 'Blaster' Biancalana
> <dottorblaster at archlinux.us> wrote:
>> I like the idea, this seems KISS as it is now.
>> It could be a better way to manage services, kudos!
> It could also be incorporated into the rc.d functions, making it
> elegant to use from within the scripts.
> The question is, can a few lines of shell code (as has been
> demonstrated by the bugfix in the bug report above), manage the
> problem sufficiently? If yes, then a full, separate program to handle
> this stuff is _not_ KISS.

i'd agree here ... feels like a excessive solution for a low-incidence
problem.  in the past it was very rare for initscripts or anything
related to cause issue (for me anyway).  ultimately it's a larger
problem -- there is no such thing as "handling pid files correctly" --
the method itself is flawed.  AFAIK systemd is the only one capable of
truly handling desired behavior correctly, thru use of cgroups.

FTW i have systemd active on ~5 desktops and ~8 servers -- XBMC media
center machine, primary in-home hypervisor, all the instances under
the hypervisor, netbooks/laptops/etc -- with much success.  i can bang
out a new unit file in about 2 minutes and <10 LOC with 100x the power
and flexibility of start-stop-daemon ... no one should be writing
daemon-scripts  anymore :-) it's 2011 baby!

i didn't start with the intention to advocate sysd instead, but i
think start-stop-daemon is an antiquated solution to a problem that
has much better approaches today -- i don't see much gain in trying to
switch all the daemons *everywhere* to use it, aside from purely
pedantic reasons.


C Anthony

More information about the arch-general mailing list