Re: [gentoo-dev] Baselayout-2 progress?

[Roy Marples <roy@marples.name>]

On Friday 29 February 2008 23:23:34 Ed Wildgoose wrote:
> > [2] I use busybox as a shell and can support it when it's internal
> > start-stop-daemon applet disabled (as OpenRC has it's own variant).
>
> I guess I could just check it out instead of asking but....  What's
> missing from the busybox s-s-daemon?
>
> I am using the busybox version 95% successfully with baselayout-2 for
> example (just simple stuff mind).  The only thing it's breaking on right
> now is  a --test option which doesn't seem to exist?
>
> I'm not that fussed, I'm just curious?

s-s-d when used in an OpenRC service remembers how the daemon is started so it 
can poll to see if it's still running or not. We also use this ability to 
ensure the daemon really starts. A lot of daemons love to fork (and return 
success) before checking config and system for sanity, so sometimes it's 
needed.

OpenRC variant also works better for finding daemons on the whole, especially 
if you upgrade an already running daemon.

Plus, it supports more OS's than busybox - but to be fair, busybox only 
supports Linux.

It's also missing chroot and env options from the upstream Debian version.
It's also missing the Gentoo extras for PAM limits support and redirecting the 
daemons stdout/stderr to log files.
It also requires the crappy use of oknodo.
It fails to search for daemon arguments when stopping (important for say 
daemons using python without pidfiles)

I'm not sure that busybox would take any patches to add much of the above as 
most would add more bloat for sure.

Thanks

Roy
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list