From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] Buildroot enhancement proposal: on starting a GUI service at boot
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 22:26:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150715222602.67784238@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TH9VkiLkeg+9LWedL=2GBkAN4iAK1eO0+cs0_QW4qp7SS1qg@mail.gmail.com>
Angelo,
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:21:13 +0200, Angelo Compagnucci wrote:
> One of the common use-case for an embedded system is to start a gui at
> boot. Probably it will be the main point of interaction after all and
> the most sensitive process in the whole system.
>
> I'm thinking on adding a custom option to set correctly a gui service
> to be started at boot, something that will make easier for a buildroot
> user to start a custom gui service at boot instead of fighting with
> overlay and service scipts/files.
>
> Note that this gui service is different from a standard service: it
> should be respawned if someting goes wrong and this cannot be done in
> a normal busybox/systemv init script: for busybox/systemv it should be
> added directly to /etc/inittab.
>
> Actually I'm more oriented in adding an option into "System
> configuration": a string that will contain the command line to be
> added as a service. The matter is to individuate which init system is
> in use and acting accordingly: adding a line in /etc/inittab for
> busybox and systemv or adding a service file for systemd.
>
> Aside from technical difficulty which is none, what could be the best
> way to implement such behaviour? Is it a desirable feature for
> buildroot?
> If yes, what is the best approach to have it accepted, a "package", an
> option, where?
I don't really understand what would be the usefulness of such a thing.
The mechanism to start a "GUI service" highly depends on which
graphical library you're using. Starting a Qt on framebuffer
application will be very different from starting an application under
X.org.
To me, this is exactly the sort of things that is so system-specific
that it belongs to a project-specific rootfs overlay. You're saying
"fighting with overlay and service scripts/files", but I don't really
see where a "fight" is needed. A rootfs overlay is dead simple to us,
and if a Buildroot user is not capable of using a rootfs overlay, he
will probably not be capable of doing lots of other tasks/tweaks needed
to get his embedded Linux system running correctly.
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-15 20:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-15 15:21 [Buildroot] Buildroot enhancement proposal: on starting a GUI service at boot Angelo Compagnucci
2015-07-15 20:26 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2015-07-15 21:30 ` Angelo Compagnucci
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150715222602.67784238@free-electrons.com \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox