Re: Survey answers part 3: systemd is not portable and what this means for our ports
Helmut Grohne <email@example.com> writes:
> By far the more severe issue is socket activation, because it removes
> the need to spell out service dependencies. We cannot infer these
> dependencies later on. Instead such a wrapper must implement socket
> activation in order to work correctly. This is the non-trivial problem.
Interesting point. I am wondering if it is feasible to use x/inetd for
the socket activation.