Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] MSB: simpleinit-msb will be discontinued

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] MSB: simpleinit-msb will be discontinued
  • Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 09:16:09 -0800

Quoting Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>:
<snip>
> He didn't write 95% of telinit... rycee wrote the first draft of its
> internal functions (actually found in /etc/init.d/smgl_telinit, then I
> added some more crap to it (i.e. the parts you like ;) )
>
> simpleinit-msb is not even most of the code anymore in our init system.
>
> To answer your question:
>
> He didn't write simpleinit; Richard Gooch did, and Gooch abandoned it.
> MSB took it up and forked it. Now MSB wants a clean project in the same
> philosophy but coded to his own style.
>
> simpleinit-msb right now is pretty stable at this point, and even though
> it could have a design revision to increase its orthogonality in some
> areas, it's working well for what we use it, and the scripts that
> surround it, for. Personally, I could see some more ability to mangle
> with the internal linked list being useful for handling starting and
> stopping things in lower runlevels than the current runlevel without
> messing up shutdown order.

Whoa Nelly!

Let's think this through carefully before we decide to switch. :) I'm all for
a
better init system, but simpleinit-msb has been doing just fine for a while
now. With 1.0 a close 4 months away, I'm not sure we have time to do an entire
init conversion along with testing. I propose that we wait until lfsinit
releases a "stable" version before even looking at it, then after that we can
see if lfsinit has any benefits over simpleinit-msb that we want/need and how
much work (if any) is needed to convert our scripts to the new init. After
that
we can decide if we want to switch or not.

If we feel that we can get our init switched over to lfsinit with lfsinit
being
stable /and/ still finish our other targets for 1.0 on time, then let's
discuss
this, but if not, we should probably focus on the other items we said we
wanted
for our 1.0. :)

-sandalle

--
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
http://counter.li.org/ #196285 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page