Re: Could s6-scscan ignore non-servicedir folders?

From: Avery Payne <avery.p.payne_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 22:33:49 -0800

On 1/21/2015 7:19 PM, post-sysv wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what effective and worthwhile ways there are to express
> service *relationships*,
> however, or what that would exactly entail. I think service conflicts
> and service bindings might
> be flimsy to express without a formal system, though I don't think
> it's anything that pre-start
> conditional checks and finish checks can't emulate, perhaps less
> elegantly?
>
This brings to mind the discussion from Jan. 8 about "./provides", where
a defining a daemon implies:

* the service that it actually provides (SMTP, IMAP, database, etc.);
think of it as the "doing", the piece that performs work

* a data transport (pipe, file, fifo, socket, IPv4, etc.); think of it
as how you connect to it

* a protocol (HTTP, etc.); think of it as a grammar for conversing with
the service, with vertical/specific applications like MySQL having their
own grammars, i.e. MySQL-3, MySQL-4, MySQL-5, etc. for each generation
that the grammar changes.

I'm sure there are other bits and pieces missing. With regard to
relationships, if you had a mapping of these, it would be a start
towards a set of formal (although incomplete) definitions. From that
you could say "I need a database that speaks MySQL-4 over a file socket"
and you could, in theory, have a separate program bring up MySQL 4.01
over a file socket when needed.

But do we really need this?
Received on Thu Jan 22 2015 - 06:33:49 UTC