From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NvBPM-0001kd-Bc for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:25:12 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 72FBEE095B; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:25:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.webfaction.com (mail6.webfaction.com [74.55.86.74]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 298E4E095B for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:25:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com (mail-ww0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by smtp.webfaction.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0A91C7597B for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 10:25:07 -0500 (CDT) Received: by wwb22 with SMTP id 22so4313500wwb.40 for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:25:05 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.179.5 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:25:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8f234f341003180758i4f095a0atf1dccaebf7ac66e0@mail.gmail.com> References: <8f234f341003180758i4f095a0atf1dccaebf7ac66e0@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:25:05 +0100 Received: by 10.216.86.142 with SMTP id w14mr617436wee.33.1269617105444; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:25:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8f234f341003260825t73a6ac79ma99177d7c0ef491d@mail.gmail.com> Subject: [gentoo-soc] Re: Two ideas: R package installer (CRAN) and per-user daemons From: Auke Booij To: gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 7af1f460-fb80-4c22-b82b-151439cd3750 X-Archives-Hash: 38ee7f676c69964866a4d5dd8e2d264b I'd like to get more thoughts on this. Should it share code with OpenRC (that's what makes init.d scripts work, right?), or be a completely separate program? If it's a new program, should it use the same init.d "standard"? I was also thinking of inter-user dependencies, where system init.d scripts can depend on user init.d scripts, and, if the other users allows this, users can depend others' init.d scripts. Would such possibilities be useful? What about root not allowing users to create new init.d scripts, but only launch an existing one on their behalf (ie., root gives you a list of daemons you can launch, but you cannot create your own)? I guess the configuration files should be based on Bash (especially considering some env variables could be useful)? Thanks in advance for all your ideas, tulcod. On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Auke Booij wrote: > 2. Per-user daemons. Currently, there are some daemons, like > PulseAudio, jackd, several download daemons, and soon possibly X.org > (which will no longer need to run as root, and really should run as a > normal user), which run as specific users, instead of root or a > systemwide daemon-specific user. There is currently no framework for > launching these daemons at all, and the current solution is to either > make users figure out their own solution (a popular one is an extra > line in .xinitrc), or to set the username in some conf.d file, thus > disabling the possibility to run several of them for different users. > I would like to develop an extension to our current init.d system > which will enable users to write and start their own init scripts, > which at first only run as themselves, not as another user. This would > make it possible to cleanly launch several identical daemons for > several users. This project would involve either writing a new > additional init.d system, or extend our current system. I would like > to know 1. if you guys are understanding a word of what I'm saying at > all 2. if this would be an interesting idea (I think it is, of course) > 3. anyone has any ideas or would like to mentor me.