Personally, when using qmail and djbdns, I found daemontools to be a bit of an annoyance. But, as you said, it's purely a matter of taste. I'm all about the availability of choice when benefits can result. I'll leave it up to real Gentoo devs as to whether or not a USE flag would be the best choice (can't think of anything better off the top of my head), but it certainly seems worth a looksee. Hallgrimur H. Gunnarsson wrote: >Sorry, I forgot to answer the real question :-). There is definitely >a positive impact. > >Daemontools is just an alternative to init.d, it has some advantages >over it in my opinion, such as portability, more flexibility with >signals, logging and more. You can read up on some of the advantages >in the http://cr.yp.to/daemontools/faq.html. > >Of course, this is a matter of taste. But daemontools is already being >used to supervise some services, such as qmail and djbdns. And since >it's already in use, I think it'd be the right thing to do to implement >some generic mechanism in which services can offer you to use >daemontools to supervise them, i.e. the USE flag. > >-- hhg > >On 09.09.2003 "Hallgrimur H. Gunnarsson" wrote: > > >>On 09.09.2003 "Bryan D. Stine" wrote: >> >> >>>But doesn't daemontools itself use an initscript anyway? I suppose you >>>just want this to be used in a way similar to how it works with qmail >>>and djbdns? It's an interesting idea, but (excuse my ignorance on this) >>>I don't really see what positive impact it will have on the system. Feel >>>free to insult and enlighten me! >>> >>> >>Daemontools has to be run from somewhere yes, just as init.d is >>run through inittab. >> >>Daemontools is currently being executed through an init.d script, >>which is not the preferred way to do it. Usually you run it from >>inittab. >> >>-- hhg >> >>-- >>gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list >> >> >> > > > >