Bug#727708: init system thoughts
Cameron Norman <camerontnorman@gmail.com> writes:
>> > I think you raise a lot of good points in this email, but here you
>> > are saying something which may demonstrate your (understandable)
>> > confusion about the Upstart event model. Upstart does not treat
>> > dependencies as events. Often times, Upstart //jobs// treat
>> > dependencies as events (and the ones you wrote below do), but
>> > events do not signal a dependency. Just because you said that
>> > jobOne starts with jobTwo does not mean that jobOne needs jobTwo,
>> > just that during boot up jobOne will start with jobTwo. To express
>> > a dependency, jobTwo needs to have a "start on (event where I am
>> > needed)". If, for example, jobOne depends on a dbus interface of
>> > jobTwo, then jobTwo could have a "start on dbus ..." to show that
>> > dependency.
>>
>> I think I understand what you're saying, thanks for the explanations!
>>
>> However, I can't say that this improved understanding has improved my
>> opinion about upstart. If I understand correctly, this means that either
>>
[...]
>> or
>>
>> b) a package providing jobOne that depends on jobTwo from another
>> package needs to patch the *other* package's configuration to add the
>> dependency information to jobTwo's definition.
>>
>
> Yes. The patch would, however, be limited to a "or (...)" in the start on
> section. So it is not like the patch is going to change a ton.
No it's not a difficult change, but you'd be patching a *different
packages* configuration file. I am not a dpkg expert, but I'm pretty
sure this is not something a maintainer script should do.
Best,
Nikolaus
--
Encrypted emails preferred.
PGP fingerprint: 5B93 61F8 4EA2 E279 ABF6 02CF A9AD B7F8 AE4E 425C
»Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«
Reply to: