On the possibility of using upstart...

On the possibility of using upstart...

[Rich Pixley]

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.

--rich

Re: On the possibility of using upstart...

[Otavio Salvador]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1413 bytes --]

Dear Rich,

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Rich Pixley <rich.pixley@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.

Regards,

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1955 bytes --]

Re: On the possibility of using upstart...

[Rich Pixley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1672 bytes --]

On 5/30/12 11:44 , Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Dear Rich,
>
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Rich Pixley <rich.pixley@palm.com 
> <mailto:rich.pixley@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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2579 bytes --]

Re: On the possibility of using upstart...

[Otavio Salvador]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 780 bytes --]

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Rich Pixley <rich.pixley@palm.com> wrote:

> 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?
>

Yes and no; having it on a separate layer allow for easy work and avoid
problems to users not using or wanting to use it.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1449 bytes --]