Re: launchd port: Worth it?

[Aleksej Saushev <asau%inbox.ru@localhost>]

  Hello,

Julian Djamil Fagir <gnrp%komkon2.de@localhost> writes:

> I've been looking at the GSoC projects, and I saw this one:
>     http://wiki.netbsd.org/projects/project/launchd-port/
>
> I don't own an Apple and just looked at the documentation. So I wonder: Would
> we really want launchd? I mean, it's adding complexity to the boot process
> and centralising a system which has been working for decades. Is there
> really a need to integrate cron, inetd and rc?

I'd rather see another thing rather than launchd.

Currently we have two important complaints about rc.subr:
1. It is built around sh. (Someone expressed security concerns around it. Thor?)
2. It doesn't track dependencies correctly. I.e. if, say, BIND has failed to 
start,
its dependent packages are still started.

Whether parallelism does matter or not is interesting topic too,
but I don't want to discuss it.

On the other hand, we have make(1) that does track dependencies and is written 
in C.
The problem is that it is one big chunk of code.

It would be nice to have separate backend that could be used by make(1),
init subsystem, and other projects too. There's a hope that it could
help cleaning the make code too.


-- 
BECHA...
   CKOPO CE3OH...