[OE-core] On the possibility of using upstart...
Rich Pixley
rich.pixley at palm.com
Wed May 30 18:55:22 UTC 2012
On 5/30/12 11:44 , Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Dear Rich,
>
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Rich Pixley <rich.pixley at palm.com
> <mailto:rich.pixley at palm.com>> wrote:
>
> Has anyone considered the possibility of introducing upstart to
> oe-core, perhaps as an alternative?
>
> How would people feel about patches to do that?
>
> I ask because "classic", (read, "former" and "proprietary"), WebOS
> used upstart and we're considering whether to attempt to continue
> to do so as we move to oe-core, or whether to attempt to convert
> all of our components over. Either way, we have to convert a
> bunch of service scripts. And if we're going to convert a bunch
> of service scripts for oe-core components, (as distinct from
> porting service scripts for Palm components), then it would be
> much easier of those patches were to find their way into oe-core
> rather than needing to be maintained separately.
>
>
> The support for Upstart would be welcome for sure however we need to
> avoid the same mistakes we did in Systemd support; I'd say it ought to
> start as a separate layer in meta-oe for the beggining and after it
> has been properly polished we can evaluate the possibility to merge it
> onto oe-core.
>
> Current systemd classes can give you a good work base.
At least in debian/ubuntu, the service scripts come with the components
that use them. I haven't looked deeply at oe-core in this regard, but
wouldn't doing this in a separate layer involve a large number of
append/overlay links to underlying components where the linkages were
extremely fragile?
--rich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/attachments/20120530/e2da7514/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Openembedded-core
mailing list