Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Robert Xu
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 19:18, DJ Lucas wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 07/06/2010 03:46 PM, Stuart Stegall wrote: >> [SNIP] >> >> I think it would be a wise plan.  Someone can of course try converting >> all the base startup jobs over to systemd.  It might be wise t

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread DJ Lucas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07/06/2010 03:46 PM, Stuart Stegall wrote: > [SNIP] > > I think it would be a wise plan. Someone can of course try converting > all the base startup jobs over to systemd. It might be wise to > mention upstart/systemd now that it looks as though m

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Ken Moffat
On 6 July 2010 21:25, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 06.07.2010, 20:39 +0100 schrieb Ken Moffat: >> On 6 July 2010 18:50, Sebastian Plotz wrote: >> > I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace >> > Sysvinit with Upstart ... >> > >> > Here are some points fo

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Stuart Stegall
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Andrew Benton wrote: > On 06/07/10 21:25, Sebastian Plotz wrote: >> My idea was, that we're using the scripts for an unspecified time. After >> that, they may be replaced with event based jobs. >> >> Another point is, that the event based jobs are shorter than the >

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Andrew Benton
On 06/07/10 21:25, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > My idea was, that we're using the scripts for an unspecified time. After > that, they may be replaced with event based jobs. > > Another point is, that the event based jobs are shorter than the > scripts. So I think that they are easier to maintain. -->

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Andrew Benton
On 06/07/10 18:50, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace > Sysvinit with Upstart ... Reading through the README in the upstart source, it depends on libnih, nih-dbus-tool and D-BUS so it would mean adding 3 extra packages into LFS. Andy

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Stuart Stegall
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 06.07.2010, 13:38 -0500 schrieb Stuart Stegall: [SNIP] >> Fedora is dropping upstart for systemd.  openSUSE is waiting on FC14 >> and how well systemd works before proceeding with upstart/systemd. >> There's also a ITP for s

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Sebastian Plotz
Am Dienstag, den 06.07.2010, 20:39 +0100 schrieb Ken Moffat: > On 6 July 2010 18:50, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > > I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace > > Sysvinit with Upstart ... > > > > Here are some points for discussion: > > > > 1. The bootscripts can still be

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Matthew Burgess
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 20:39:51 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: > I suggest that you identify *what* > you think can be done better during the boot process, then go off and > try different method(s) - if any of them provides a significant benefit, > come back and explain why you think the change is worthwh

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Sebastian Plotz
Am Dienstag, den 06.07.2010, 13:38 -0500 schrieb Stuart Stegall: > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Sebastian Plotz > wrote: > > I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace > > Sysvinit with Upstart ... > > > > Here are some points for discussion: > > > > 1. The bootsc

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Robert Xu
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 15:10, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Sebastian Plotz wrote: >> I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace >> Sysvinit with Upstart ... >> >> Here are some points for discussion: >> >> 1. The bootscripts can still be used (like Ubuntu did). >> 2. The LFS u

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Ken Moffat
On 6 July 2010 18:50, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace > Sysvinit with Upstart ... > > Here are some points for discussion: > > 1. The bootscripts can still be used (like Ubuntu did). > 2. The LFS user will learn something about old t

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Robert Xu
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 14:49, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 06.07.2010, 14:09 -0400 schrieb Robert Xu: >> But that requires SysVinit tools. > > Did you mean halt, init, runlevel, shutdown, telinit, ...? They are all > included in Upstart, too. > > Upstart is compatible with Sysvinit.

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Sebastian Plotz wrote: > I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace > Sysvinit with Upstart ... > > Here are some points for discussion: > > 1. The bootscripts can still be used (like Ubuntu did). > 2. The LFS user will learn something about old techniques (runlevels)

Re: Sysklogd --> syslog-ng?

2010-07-06 Thread Kevin White
On 7/6/2010 2:09 PM, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > What about changing from Sysklogd to syslog-ng? > > - syslog-ng is under active development > - sysklogd is quiet old (last version released in 2007) > - we just need to run one daemon (instead of syslogd and klogd) > Or rsyslog: http://www.rsyslog.co

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Kevin White
On 7/6/2010 2:09 PM, Robert Xu wrote: > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 13:50, Sebastian Plotz wrote: >> I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace >> Sysvinit with Upstart ... >> >> Here are some points for discussion: >> >> 1. The bootscripts can still be used (like Ubuntu di

Re: Sysklogd --> syslog-ng?

2010-07-06 Thread Stuart Stegall
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > What about changing from Sysklogd to syslog-ng? > > - syslog-ng is under active development > - sysklogd is quiet old (last version released in 2007) > - we just need to run one daemon (instead of syslogd and klogd) > > -- > http://linuxfrom

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Sebastian Plotz
Am Dienstag, den 06.07.2010, 14:09 -0400 schrieb Robert Xu: > But that requires SysVinit tools. Did you mean halt, init, runlevel, shutdown, telinit, ...? They are all included in Upstart, too. Upstart is compatible with Sysvinit. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: htt

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Stuart Stegall
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Robert Xu wrote: > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 13:50, Sebastian Plotz wrote: >> I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace >> Sysvinit with Upstart ... >> >> Here are some points for discussion: >> >> 1. The bootscripts can still be used (li

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Stuart Stegall
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace > Sysvinit with Upstart ... > > Here are some points for discussion: > > 1. The bootscripts can still be used (like Ubuntu did). > 2. The LFS user will learn something

Sysklogd --> syslog-ng?

2010-07-06 Thread Sebastian Plotz
What about changing from Sysklogd to syslog-ng? - syslog-ng is under active development - sysklogd is quiet old (last version released in 2007) - we just need to run one daemon (instead of syslogd and klogd) -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch

Re: Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Robert Xu
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 13:50, Sebastian Plotz wrote: > I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace > Sysvinit with Upstart ... > > Here are some points for discussion: > > 1. The bootscripts can still be used (like Ubuntu did). But that requires SysVinit tools. > 2. T

Sysvinit --> Upstart?

2010-07-06 Thread Sebastian Plotz
I just want to start a discussion, if it would be meaningful to replace Sysvinit with Upstart ... Here are some points for discussion: 1. The bootscripts can still be used (like Ubuntu did). 2. The LFS user will learn something about old techniques (runlevels) and new techniques (event based boot

Re: Explanation about grub's search command in chapter 8.4 of lfs book is wrong

2010-07-06 Thread Bruce Dubbs
linux fan wrote: > In long-param-notation that is: > search --no-floppy --file=filename > > Thus it is technically incorrect to imply that "[ ... the search ...] > command only sets an internal GRUB variable used to find the kernel > image. The text is correct for the search lines in the conte

Re: Explanation about grub's search command in chapter 8.4 of lfs book is wrong

2010-07-06 Thread linux fan
FYI A possible search usefulness: Or, other search methods to deduce the root filesystem for the kernel's "root=" parameter, or where the kernel is. * Suppose that the grub directory is a subdirectory of boot * Suppose that the boot directory is a subdirectory of root / * Suppose that the kernel