On Wed, 17 May 2017 18:28:16 -0400 Daniel Kahn Gillmor < d...@fifthhorseman.net> wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: normal > > I'm both upstream and the debian maintainer for vblade-persist. I > don't currently use it, and i don't have much time for it. > Furthermore, it relies on runit because i didn't trust sysvinit. with > the advent of systemd, i think that vblade-persist would be better > implemented as a vblade-launch script and a vblade@.service systemd > template that invokes vblade-launch. Then the standard systemctl > mechanisms could be used to control arbitrary vblade processes. > > this would remove the dependency on runit, and would allow local > sysadmins to control persistent units like so: > > systemctl install vblade@eth0.2.3-dev-sda2.service > > this would mean a systemd template file like (untested): > > --------------- > [Unit] > Description=vblade AOE exporter %i > > [Service] > type=simple > ExecStart=/usr/bin/vblade-launch %i > > [Install] > WantedBy=multi-user.target > --------------- > > It'd take a bit of thinking about how to handle mac address > limitations, and the decision about whether to place the symlink or > not, to bring this up to parity with the current implementation, but > then this work could be donated directly to the vblade upstream, and > we could leave it at that. > > If someone wants to adopt vblade-persist, that would be fine with me. > If someone wants to take the systemd approach i describe above, i'd be > happy to ask for an RM: for vblade-persist as well. > > --dkg > > #1AurelioJuarezCortez
