On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 08:04:27PM -0500, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * On 2015 13 Jun 18:23 -0500, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
>
> > What part of systemd are these various (non-systemd) programs
> > leveraging? Is it the sd-notify thingy? If it is that would imply a
> > different course of action than if they are using many different
> > features.
>
> I know that CUPS can be run under systemd in demand start and stop mode
> which for a desktop is a nice feature since it isn't running all the
> time. If it can do that with another daemon manager, so much the
> better, but on my desktop I am back to having CUPS running all the time
> since I exorcised systemd from it.
>

Sorry for asking a silly question, but what's the problem in having
cups "running" all the time? And better, if you start/stop cups when
you need it, why should cups notify systemd (or any other init) that
it is ready to do things? Why should init be informed of the fact that
a daemon is running or not, except maybe at boot time, and just for
the sake of allowing parallel boot?

I am sure this is just my personal idiosyncrasy, but I am more and
more convinced that all this fuss around signalling daemons activity
is just an overshoot in 99.99% of use cases, but for some reason that
I don't understand people seem to have become unable to live without
it...

:\


--
[ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG Catania -- Freaknet Medialab ]
[ me [at] katolaz.homeunix.net -- http://katolaz.homeunix.net -- ]
[ GNU/Linux User:#325780/ICQ UIN: #258332181/GPG key ID 0B5F062F ]
[ Fingerprint: 8E59 D6AA 445E FDB4 A153 3D5A 5F20 B3AE 0B5F 062F ]