Ticket #99 (new enhancement)
Opened 2 years ago
Last modified 15 months ago
Suggestion for RC events
Reported by: | Skotlex <skotlex@mailforce.net> | Owned by: | roy |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | trivial | Milestone: | |
Component: | rc | Version: | 0.4 |
Keywords: | Cc: |
Description (last modified by roy) (diff)
The original topic came up after the post in the provided URL.
The request (at first) was that there should be some way to have user-started services be left alone when switching from one run-level to another. This in turn was suggested to be converted to 'rc events':
"A better solution would be to have rc events. Basically a list of services to start and stop upon entering a state. Any services not explicitly listed in the state would not be started or stopped."
Laptop users would benefit the most out of something like this, as they may need different services running depending on whether the AC power is connected or not, or whether they are using a wireless connection versus a wired one. And using four-runlevels for specifying the services for each condition is very cumbersome.
Change History
comment:2 Changed 15 months ago by johnny@9souldier.org
- Version set to 0.4
i am not sure whether this should be handled by openrc or by the gentoo networking scripts, but network script hotplugging doesn't seem to work as i would expect it.
Specifically, i have two laptops, both with wireless cards with rf killswitches, openrc puts the networks in inactive mode when i disable the cards with the killswitch, but then doesn't re-enable them when i turn them back on.
comment:3 Changed 15 months ago by johnny@9souldier.org
i guess, i'm not persuaded though. This means we'd have a wireless runlevel starting whenever the killswitch is turned off, or what do you have in mind?
i'd think it's more related to udev/hal/dbus or /sys events. i'm unsure as to wether there is a generic interface to look at for system events (i'm kind of scared that one would have to communicate with dbus/hal).
comment:4 Changed 15 months ago by roy
Fair point :)
Could this be solved by the recently added stackable runlevels in #88?