[root@KRISHNA san2ban]# pstree
runit─┬─clamd───{clamd}
├─console-kit-dae───64*[{console-kit-dae}]
├─crond
├─2*[dbus-daemon]
├─dbus-launch
├─dhcpcd
├─freshclam
├─gvfs-fuse-daemo───3*[{gvfs-fuse-daemo}]
├─gvfs-udisks2-vo───{gvfs-udisks2-vo}
├─gvfsd
├─lxdm-binary─┬─X
│ └─lxsession─┬─lxpanel
│ ├─openbox
│ ├─pcmanfm
│ └─{lxsession}
├─lxterminal─┬─bash───su───bash
│ ├─bash───su───bash───pstree
│ ├─gnome-pty-helpe
│ └─{lxterminal}
├─menu-cached
├─polkit-gnome-au───{polkit-gnome-au}
├─polkitd───{polkitd}
├─runsvdir─┬─runsv─┬─crond
│ │ └─svlogd
│ ├─runsv───ngetty
│ └─runsv───svlogd
├─syslog-ng───syslog-ng
├─systemd-udevd
└─udisksd───3*[{udisksd}]
[root@KRISHNA san2ban]#
rc.conf still exists. should these files be deleted?
]]>I tried to download 'runit' from http://smarden.org/runit/install.html
Somehow, though 107kB file, I am unable to download it into /package dir as mentioned on the web page. Ofcourse, I had actually created the directory, but this tar ball, .tar.gz, fails to download
My question is, if the package is unsupported, still can we go ahead and try it?
Sure, it's your machine.
So, will somebody help me in using runit?
Unsupported packages are unsupported. However, you might receive assistance if you ask nicely in the AUR subforum. As always though, don't expect anyone to hold your hand.
]]>[root@KRISHNA package]# yaourt -S runit-dietlibc
==> Downloading runit-dietlibc PKGBUILD from AUR...
x PKGBUILD
x rsvlog
x runit.install
Comment by: bougyman on Fri, 20 May 2011 17:10:20 +0000
Moved /usr/bin/rsvlog here from runit-run-git, this is where it belongs as runit-services-git should only depend on this package, and it uses rsvlog. This causes a bit of chicken and egg upgrading, simply upgrade runit-run-git first and this should install cleanly, though.
First Submitted: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 17:19:46 +0000
runit-dietlibc 2.1.1-5
( Unsupported package: Potentially dangerous ! )
==> Edit PKGBUILD ? [Y/n] ("A" to abort)
==> ------------------------------------
A
==> Aborted...
I've come around--after a long period of resistance--to the idea that systemd is arguably simpler than the initscripts. The latter essentially all function as independent programs with the task of then launching yet other programs, all of which it is hoped will continue to work as a single, overarching system indefinitely. Having a unified, distro-agnostic code-base with built-in redundancies (or so I assume; that's at least what I've gleaned from what I've read so far), contributed to by devs from around the Linux ecosphere, seems far better than something which, while having worked for so long, could retroactively be borked and then only fixed with several man-hours of debugging several different complex scripts. Sure, systemd has its own abstraction in the form of *.service files (which, from this end-user's perspective, are relatively simple themselves), but the uniformity seems like an acceptable exchange to me, and in my mind a philosophy is only as valid as its practicality. But again, limited perspective here.
I could not agree more
]]>robustness
The word you're looking for is robustitude.
]]>