Re: [DNG] Supervision scripts (was Re: OpenRC and Devuan)

From: Avery Payne <>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 15:49:06 -0700

Regarding the use of supervision-scripts as "glue" in distributions, yes,
the project was meant for that. Most - but not all of - the scripts are in
working order, as I use them at home on my personal server. If you are
willing to take the time to remap the names (as needed), the scripts should
work out-of-the-box. If you have questions, need help, or get stuck, write
to me and I'll do my best to give you answers.

Currently, these design problems remain:

* account name mappings that correspond to how the names are set up in the
* hard coded file pathing, which is inconsistent between distributions,
* handling of device names, which are inconsistent between kernels,
* handling of "instances", where one service will be "reused" over and over
(think multiple web servers of the same type on different ports),
* the "versioning problem", which I have (inadequately) described elsewhere
on the mailing list. The current design addresses this.

My personal life has been very busy, and I needed a break, so there hasn't
been much movement. Now that things are slowing, I can turn my attention
to it again this summer. I have a plan to revitalize supervision-scripts
which addresses all (or most) of the listed design problems. The current
plan is:

* come up with clear definitions of the problems,
* a proposal, detailing solutions step by step, which will become a design
* peer review of the document for inaccuracies and errors,
* close out the existing design and archive it,
* announce the old design as version 0.1, for historical interest,
* conversion of the existing design's data into new data structures, and
* finally, writing the code needed to generate the proper ./run files based
on the data provided.

The first step is mostly done. The second one is just starting.

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Steve Litt <>

> On Tue, 3 May 2016 22:41:48 -1000
> Joel Roth <> wrote:
> > We're not the first people to think about supporting
> > alternative init systems. There are collections of the
> > init scripts already available.
> >
> >
> >
> Those can serve as references and starting points, but I don't think
> either one is complete, and in Avery's case, that can mean you don't
> know whether a given daemon's run script and environment was complete
> or not. In tokiclover's case, that github page implies that the only run
> scripts he had were for the gettys, and that's pretty straightforward
> (and well known) anyway.
> As I remember, before he had to put it aside for awhile, Avery was
> working on new ways of testing whether needed daemons (like the
> network) were really functional. That would have been huge.
> Another source of daemon startup scripts his here:
> SteveT
> Steve Litt
> April 2016 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century
Received on Fri May 06 2016 - 22:49:06 UTC

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