From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: systemd controversy Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 19:56:24 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 19:56:24 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1caa94953308d6b372e5a50b12554bf8"; logging-data="374277"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18P2wKp5qJHB/ABY/HIe1E6" User-Agent: Pan/0.155 (Kherson; fc5a80b8) Cancel-Lock: sha1:UCfkRZTpyfE/6dpfsBcUDedD8DU= Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:66140 List-Id: On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 18:05:20 +0100, streaksu wrote: > On 3/13/24 22:55, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> If you are writing code that will run as one or more server processes, >> you will likely also want to provide scripts/config to manage those >> processes. For systemd, that could be service definition files. > > ... to my understanding, that might be better managed by distribution / > OS maintainers, rather than developers. I was thinking more about code being written for in-house use by particular customers--I should have made that clear. However, what you say is true for open-source code that is being published. Though I suspect it would still be helpful to provide some info about how interlocking processes are supposed to fit together, and systemd .service files could serve as a lingua franca for that, even for distros that don’t use systemd. The declarative systemd unit-file syntax should be easier to translate to other forms than perhaps going the other way.