ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[Martin Pitt <martin.pitt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Oliver Grawert [2014-05-03 11:42 +0200]:
> well, we either give access to the init system itself or we add
> something on top, i dont see whats wrong with using an established
> system for the second option

 - It requires us to spawn a shell and parse a file, for something
   which is already built into our init systems.

 - It duplicates configuration and thus can lead to confusing
   situations where you enable/disable it in one place and forget the
   other

 - It is incompatible with modern init system's handling of
   dependencies, lifecycle management, and state supervision. I. e. in
   each upstart job/systemd units you have to add ugly error handling
   for the case when you disable the service with /etc/default. I. e.
   A job/unit starts, but then really doesn't, there isn't a service
   around, the init system thinks it's crashed, etc.

Martin

-- 
Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature