I leave the project

Joel Miller cheeziologist at mail.isc.rit.edu
Thu Jul 8 21:03:32 PDT 2004


Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> 
> 
>>On Thursday 08 July 2004 09:32 pm, Ryan.Oliver at pha.com.au wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>well, theres two solutions - either we go for fully hierarchical
>>>>asynchronous, event driven bootscripts (way cool, but perhaps an
>>>>LFS 7.0 thing)
>>>
>>>Now THAT sounds like some fun :-D
>>>Count me in on that hackery ;-)
>>>
>>>[R]
>>
>>
>>I agree. :)  Ian, care to expand on that idea a bit? It sounds very 
>>interesting, but I'm not sure I fully grasp the concept.
> 
> 
> Absolutely, there are more than just three of us interested in this concept.
> 
> To some degree this brings back the old "depinit/minit/runit" discussion 
> of using a system startup process that is dependency based rather than 
> strictly ordered. With the addition of hotplug, device additions and 
> removals become additional dependency events that can cause scripts to 
> get run to start/stop services.
> 

Allow me to hijack this thread a little further, but every time people 
mention dependancy based init scripts this thought pops into my mind. 
Isn't make built to handle dependency things like this? I'm very 
amateurish in both programming and scripting but my understanding of 
make suggests to me that it is capable of something like this. I could 
easily be wrong, though, as this is barely-charted water for me.

-- 
Registered LFS User 6929
Registered Linux User 298182



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list