Re: On possibly "finer" dependencies in s6-rc

From: Laurent Bercot <>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 18:00:40 +0200

On 29/09/2015 16:28, Casper Ti. Vector wrote:
> as a mechanism, the online virtual is demanding to implement
> in an RC system, but might be even much more difficult to implement
> elsewhere. More than that, this mechanism fits naturally into an RC
> system, so it is architecturally a reasonable part of s6-rc.

  On a theoretical level, I tend to agree; and I will definitely
think about handling virtual services in s6-rc if a real-world case
  The main reason why I didn't do it is that it increases complexity
of the dependency engine *considerably*; and in practice, as long
as your online set of virtual dependencies isn't too high, it's still
simpler (in terms of code maintainability) to keep a set of compiled
databases around and switch them with s6-rc-update.
  I agree that it defers some of the burden to the user, a burden that
should be handled by s6-rc itself. I could work on some scripts to
automate that kind of database management, if you think it would be

> say that your way of `eth0'/`wlan0' switching is a choice of policy,
> which does not make up for the incompleteness in the set of mechanism
> provided by s6-rc.

  I think you're right in principle; I just compromised here in the name
of practicality. It's definitely a possibility of evolution for s6-rc
if it becomes a real issue.

Received on Tue Sep 29 2015 - 16:00:40 UTC

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