Zygmunt Krynicki wrote: > W dniu sob, cze 1, 2013 o 12:52 ,nadawca John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> napisał: > > On 06/01/2013 12:24 PM, Vincent Bernat wrote: > > I don't know how systemd behaves in this way (so this is not > > something to hold against upstart), but there are so many > > daemons that need to be started after the network has been > > configured that it should be easy to do this. For example, > > most daemons binding to a specific address needs to be > > started after the address has been configured. > > Which is exactly the very one design decision which is wrong in > > upstart. Starting any service as soon as all its dependencies are > > fulfilled, is putting the dependency chain upside down and doesn't > > make any sense. There is no point to start a daemon unless you > > actually need it.
Correct about the design, but not about the practical use. Even under systemd, the default configuration is typically to make services always start without waiting for on-demand loading. > I believe there was a counter example of using CUPS where unless you > really start it, other machines won't discover it via avahi and you > won't be able to print to a networked printer. That's not a counterexample to the substantial points though. It shows that you shouldn't be too careless in setting up on-demand loading if you want it, but that isn't really what was being discussed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1370089583.3628.219.camel@glyph.nonexistent.invalid
