Hi Jan, Do you have any thoughts on this idea?
I also note that fghack support for chpst has today been merged into runit's git branch for a future release (although the fghack command is not yet emulated by it)! Andrew On Sat, Feb 28, 2026 at 09:48:35AM +0000, Andrew Bower wrote: > On Sat, Feb 21, 2026 at 08:34:19PM +0100, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: > > A, makes sense; thanks for this explanation. I'll wait for Jan Mojžíš's > > opinion: he's done most of the work on the daemontools packaging. > > Great! If Jan agrees in principle then before committing the change I > think it is worth thinking about what the best user experience would be > for grouping the tools together. > > Pros for bunching them together > > + easier to switch in or out the whole bank > + slightly less boilerplate in dh_installalternatives control files > > Pros for tool-by-tool alternatives > > * handles incomplete suport (e.g. chpst cannot yet [1] emulate fghack) > * lets more packages with varying range of tools join in the fun, e.g. > s6. > * avoid confusion of needing one arbitrary tool to be the 'main' one > > I have a hunch it might be best to do this on a tool-by-tool basis. I > don't mind reworking the patch if this is desired. > > [1] https://github.com/g-pape/runit/pull/23
