netconf and upstart

[Thomas Hood]

martin f krafft wrote:
> However, as with dbus, I cannot make upstart a dependency. SysV may
> be flawed in many ways and upstart looks promising, but for servers,
> init.d has been working fine for years and will continue to be used
> for years. Debian will not make upstart the default any time soon,
> so making netconf depend on it would be an obstacle for netconf
> replacing ifupdown.


I see that Petter Reinholdtsen is now co-maintainer of ifupdown so
there's a good chance of getting the necessary cooperation from that
direction.

I just paged through your presentation.  Nice!

A new network configurer should be properly integrated with upstart.
The task-dependency system in upstart could be used to model the
dependencies of network services on one another; upstart's supervision
could be used to supervise network connectivity.

I suspect, however, that a higher level language is needed to allow
the administrator to express his network configuration preferences
succinctly.  (Higher than upstart's configuration files, I mean.  It
should also be better designed than /e/n/i-ish.)  Chris Hanson once
started defining such a language but I don't know how far he got.   If
the language describes end states then the configurer should be smart
enough to know how to get the system into that state, or as close to
it as possible given the constraints of the situation.
-- 
Thomas Hood