Alex Grabowski <hurufu_at_gmail.com> writes:
> On 5/16/26 05:11, Alexis wrote:
>> Alex, have i got that right?
>>
>
> Short answer kind of yes.
>
> This email thread got me thinking about coupling between
> different
> programs in a system, that "script" is quite tightly coupled
> with
> program that starts it ("A"), because "A" needs to display some
> GUI
> confirmation about progress so far and is blocked by the
> script. So it
> is better to think about "script" as a part of that service "A"
> and
> not as a separate service, but indeed it provides a service (ie.
> something becomes available on the device (related to security)
> when
> the script is done).
*nod*
Yeah, part of the issue is that in casual use, the sort of
distinction i made isn't necessarily (or even usually) used. E.g.:
"metalog provides a logging service"
And metalog can do so by being run directly, without a 'wrapper'
appropriate to the init /supervision / management system in use.
Further, a daemon can be a script - rather than something compiled
- which then gets called by what i'm calling the 'wrapper'
script. In such a case - to make up a silly example, 'chaird' - we
can then have a situation of:
"The `chaird` service script starts the `chaird` daemon script,
which provides a chair service."
%-}
i guess it's one of those cases where considering the context
can't be avoided.
Alexis.
Received on Sat May 16 2026 - 10:03:57 CEST