Sujet : Re: systemd controversy
De : ldo (at) *nospam* nz.invalid (Lawrence D'Oliveiro)
Groupes : comp.lang.adaDate : 18. Mar 2024, 21:56:24
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <uta698$bdg5$4@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : Pan/0.155 (Kherson; fc5a80b8)
On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 18:05:20 +0100, streaksu wrote:
On 3/13/24 22:55, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
If you are writing code that will run as one or more server processes,
you will likely also want to provide scripts/config to manage those
processes. For systemd, that could be service definition files.
... to my understanding, that might be better managed by distribution /
OS maintainers, rather than developers.
I was thinking more about code being written for in-house use by
particular customers--I should have made that clear.
However, what you say is true for open-source code that is being
published. Though I suspect it would still be helpful to provide some info
about how interlocking processes are supposed to fit together, and
systemd .service files could serve as a lingua franca for that, even for
distros that don’t use systemd. The declarative systemd unit-file syntax
should be easier to translate to other forms than perhaps going the other
way.