Re: thoughts on rudimentary dependency handling

From: Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 23:02:15 +0000

Laurent Bercot:
> I'm of the opinion that packagers will naturally go towards what gives
> them the less work, and the reason why supervision frameworks have
> getting in is that they require different scripting and organization, so
> supporting them would give packagers a lot of work; whereas sticking to
> the SysV way allows them not to change what they already have.
> Especially with systemd around, which they already kinda have to convert
> services to, I don't see them bothering with another out of the way
> packaging design.
> So, to me, the really important work that you are doing is the run script
> collection and standardization. If you provide packagers with already
> run scripts, you are helping them tremendously by reducing the amount of
> work that supervision support needs, and they'll be more likely to
adopt it.

nosh 1.12 comes with a collection of some 177 pre-built service bundles.
  As I said to the FreeBSD people, I have a goal of making the 155
service bundles that should replace most of FreeBSD rc.d . (There are a
load of non-FreeBSD bundles in there, including ones for VirtualBox
services, OpenStack, RabbitMQ, and so forth. This is why I haven't
reached 155 even though I've made 177.)

It also comes with a tool for importing system service and socket units
into service bundles. And the nosh Guide chapter on creating service
bundles has pointers to the run file collections by Gerrit Pape, Wayne
Marshall, Kevin J. DeGraaf, and Glenn Strauss.

     xdg-open /usr/local/share/doc/nosh/creating-bundles.html

Incidental note: I just added another service bundle, for nagios, to
version 1.13 because of this:

Enjoy this, too:
Received on Mon Jan 19 2015 - 23:02:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun May 09 2021 - 19:44:19 UTC