On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 07:37:21PM +0200, Laurent Bercot wrote:
> Please don't do this.
> The more you bend to the systemd interfaces, the more it gets a foot
> in the door. By implementing a dummy sd_notify, you acknowledge the
> validity of the interface; you accept that the systemd people have
> created something worth using, and you validate the existence of
> (a part of) systemd.


If systemd has some good parts but systemd is bad cause it has a lot of
other bad parts, and even the good parts are bad implemented, i don't
see why we can't get only the good parts and reimplement them in a
better way.

For example, in this specific sd_notify, i can see a good thing to have
a little "do only one thing" little daemon+library that implement the
sd_notify call and the open compile an ascii text pseudofile somewhere
in /sys with a list of "ready to use" daemons, and maybe also a unix
socket where other daemons, a script, an init can connect to to have
real time notifications of daemon getting ready.

This way we have a great feature, one of the few good features of
systemd, but implemented in a unix, kiss and indipendent (and good) way.

So, why not?


--

Franco (nextime) Lanza
Lonate Pozzolo (VA) - Italy
SIP://casa@???
web: http://www.nexlab.net

NO TCPA: http://www.no1984.org
you can download my public key at:
http://danex.nexlab.it/nextime.asc || Key Servers
Key ID = D6132D50
Key fingerprint = 66ED 5211 9D59 DA53 1DF7 4189 DFED F580 D613 2D50
-----------------------------------
echo 16i[q]sa[ln0=aln100%Pln100/snlbx]sbA0D212153574F444E49572045535520454D20454B414D204F54204847554F4E452059415020544F4E4E4143205345544147204C4C4942snlbxq | dc
-----------------------------------