|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > April 2004 > Split packages providing services (Re: Release update)
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Split packages providing services (Re: Release update)
|
|
| Gerrit Pape 2004-04-01, 3:36 pm |
| On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 03:08:54PM +0100, Zefram wrote:
> Therefore, I suggest that we separate each of these daemon packages into
> two, one that provides the daemon software and a separate one to run it.
> That way those of us who want to install a daemon and use it in our own
> way would not be hampered by someone's idea of how the daemon should
> normally be run. And where the daemon is packaged with a client,
> installing the client wouldn't cause an unwanted daemon to run.
I agree. Having the programs and the service split into two packages
has another advantage, see this thread; it also points to few packages
already doing what you suggest
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux...l.general/52773
Regards, Gerrit.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Zefram 2004-04-01, 3:38 pm |
| Gerrit Pape wrote:
>I agree. Having the programs and the service split into two packages
>has another advantage, see this thread; it also points to few packages
>already doing what you suggest
Splitting the packages also allows a distinction in the dependencies of
other software. "Depends: bazd-server" (i.e., bazd running and doing
stuff) should be distinct from "Depends: bazd" (i.e., bazd available
on disk).
All in all, it seems like exactly the kind of distinction that the
package system is there to make.
-zefram
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Oliver Kurth 2004-04-01, 3:39 pm |
| On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 21:10, Gerrit Pape wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 03:08:54PM +0100, Zefram wrote:
>
> I agree. Having the programs and the service split into two packages
> has another advantage, see this thread; it also points to few packages
> already doing what you suggest
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux...l.general/52773
I think that is another problem. Splitting of the init script still
leaves the problem that all MTAs provide a /usr/sbin/sendmail link. I
think here splitting may make sense, or maybe a scheme similar to
/etc/alternatives.
If all daemons could be disabled in /etc/init.d/ , it would be possible
to use other schemes to start up services, eg. runit. or daemontools. If
it is a unified way, this could be done by a simple script.
If the daemon packages were split into two, it wouldn't be easy to 'just
switch that service on/off', because I would have to install/reinstall
the package that provides the init script. Sometimes I want to start a
web server on my notebook, so others can download files, but I do not
want that runnung all the time.
I already installed file-rc, this seems to be a nice solution.
Greetings,
Oliver
| |
| Patrice Fortier 2004-04-02, 7:37 am |
| Le jeu 01/04/2004 à 22:07, Zefram a écrit :
> Splitting the packages also allows a distinction in the dependencies of
> other software. "Depends: bazd-server" (i.e., bazd running and doing
> stuff) should be distinct from "Depends: bazd" (i.e., bazd available
> on disk).
Except that if bazd-server isn't there, it does't mean that it's not
running. And if I didn't installed bazd-server, it's maybe to make my
custom scripts and _not_ have yours.
You can also have a case where it is installed, but not running
anyway.
What I mean is that you can't make any assumptions on what's "running"
based on which package is installed.
Regards,
Patrice.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Gerrit Pape 2004-04-02, 1:37 pm |
| On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 01:52:28PM +0200, Patrice Fortier wrote:
> What I mean is that you can't make any assumptions on what's "running"
> based on which package is installed.
I would say that if you install a package providing ``ftp-server'', you
can assume you have a ftp server run automatically; if you install an
``imap-server'' package, you have an imap server run on your system.
This only isn't true if the admin has disabled the service manually, and
``knows what he's doing''.
Regards, Gerrit.
--
Open projects at http://smarden.org/pape/.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Patrice Fortier 2004-04-05, 8:34 am |
| Le ven 02/04/2004 à 19:12, Gerrit Pape a écrit :
> On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 01:52:28PM +0200, Patrice Fortier wrote:
>
> I would say that if you install a package providing ``ftp-server'', you
> can assume you have a ftp server run automatically;
No, you may want to disable your ftp server from time to time. Same
thing with sshd.
> if you install an
> ``imap-server'' package, you have an imap server run on your system.
Indeed. 
> This only isn't true if the admin has disabled the service manually, and
> ``knows what he's doing''.
Which something trivial, and a lot of admins do this.
Regards,
Patrice.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|