tushart at abbnm.com
Mon May 5 13:32:26 PDT 2003
Stefan Krah wrote:
>* "Michael A. Peters" <mpeters at mac.com> wrote:
>>To clarify my view on this -
>>There is already standard facilities for stopping/starting daemons in
>>LFS/BLFS via the sysV init mechanism.
>Daemontools include a fabulous logging mechanism as well as other
>*really* useful programs.
>>By adding DJB's daemontools it adds complexity to the system because
>>there are now more than one way that daemons are controlled. Some with
>>SysV init and some with daemontools (and potentially some with xinetd -
>>though I haven't found a need to install xinetd and would prefer not to
>>for the same reason of simplicity).
>So lets kick out sysvinit.
I guess most of the users would vote for exactly the opposite:)
>>qmail can be started by the facilities that LFS/BLFS already have (SysV
>>init) and I just don't think its a good idea to have a separate facility
>>for doing what already can be done with the standard facility that
>>virtually all LFS/BLFS'ers already have (SysV init). For those who chose
>>a BSD style init script instead, qmail can be started that way as well.
>IMO, which is shared by the overwhelming majority on the qmail mailing
>list, a novice should install qmail according to:
>LWQ uses daemontools. And why do you keep mentioning qmail. I run most
>of my daemons under daemontools.
My biggest gripe with the way described there is "Why don't I get to
choose how I want to install the package?"
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the blfs-dev