Difference between revisions of "Talk:Daemons"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Merge with Systemd: typo)
(Merge with Systemd: re)
Line 17: Line 17:
  
 
::::::::::+1, that note is a creative interpretation of "background process" at best. I'd just revise the intro sentence and merge it to [[Init]] if applicable. We can still add an explanation to [[systemd#Units]] or link to [[Init]] from there. -- [[User:Alad|Alad]] ([[User talk:Alad|talk]]) 11:13, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 
::::::::::+1, that note is a creative interpretation of "background process" at best. I'd just revise the intro sentence and merge it to [[Init]] if applicable. We can still add an explanation to [[systemd#Units]] or link to [[Init]] from there. -- [[User:Alad|Alad]] ([[User talk:Alad|talk]]) 11:13, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 +
 +
:::::::::::I don't have preference for either the [[systemd#Units]] or the [[Init]] ideas, however I've just thought that merging [[Daemons list]] back here could be a third option that could spare this title from becoming a redirect. — [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 15:11, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:11, 24 July 2015

Merge with Systemd

Now that this page is short enough. Should we merge it into Systemd. Most of the information left are already exits in Systemd. -- Fengchao (talk) 09:50, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

+1 -- Kynikos (talk) 08:57, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I agree. Help:Style#Daemon operations should be updated first, however. -- Lonaowna (talk) 11:56, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Help:Style doesn't make reference to initscripts any more and recommends direct links to systemd now. Of course the daemon-related discussions in Help talk:Style are still current, I've just made a quick adaptation for the moment. -- Kynikos (talk) 15:16, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm all for condensing excessive information, but isn't the systemd page a little too large for a merge just yet? T1nk3r3r (talk) 06:22, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
The only problem would be merging the introduction. Daemons#Managing daemons is already duplicated in systemd#Using units.
About the excessive length of systemd, Talk:Systemd#Duplication of content in Native configuration section would give a big help.
-- Kynikos (talk) 07:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Mmmmm... progress? --Dettalk 20:45, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm still in favor: now that this discussion is bumped you can wait a couple of days for objections, and if none are raised you can go ahead with the merge if you have the time (assuming you agree as well of course). — Kynikos (talk) 11:55, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
I have all the time in the world, but where do you think it should go? It seems a little off from the entire systemd. --Dettalk 13:12, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
I think that systemd#Using units could explain a bit what a "service" is, it can start either a daemon or a "oneshot" task. By the way, I think that the note is inaccurate, systemd.service(5) states that for Type=oneshot "it is expected that the process has to exit before systemd starts follow-up units", so I would not call it a daemon. I think that the note brings more confusion than clarification, so I would leave it out. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 15:20, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
+1, that note is a creative interpretation of "background process" at best. I'd just revise the intro sentence and merge it to Init if applicable. We can still add an explanation to systemd#Units or link to Init from there. -- Alad (talk) 11:13, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
I don't have preference for either the systemd#Units or the Init ideas, however I've just thought that merging Daemons list back here could be a third option that could spare this title from becoming a redirect. — Kynikos (talk) 15:11, 24 July 2015 (UTC)