Please don't involve me in this. There are some important daemons, and other problem daemons. All I referred to was turning well known pre-configured daemons off using standard tools of my preferred distro. If you don't know what daemons you are brewing and what they are doing you are doing very different things on Linux than I am; trying to get microsecond accuracy. But learning linux is for everybody, and I'm glad you had a good discussion with our group. John Gateley wrote: > Hi y'all, > > I did not say the things Iznogoud attributed to me about config files, > HUP, > or using directories as config files. He is confusing me with Rick > Engebretson. > > Thanks to Carl Soderstrom for suggesting "monit". It looks very > interesting, > however it is more focused on monitoring and the process control is > rudimentary. I think using monit with a daemonizer is a good way to go. > > I saw no requests for summaries etc., so I am assuming nobody wants to > know what I choose. If you are interested, drop me a private e-mail > off list > and I'll tell you after I figure it out. > > Thanks > > John > > > On 1/25/17 1:02 PM, Iznogoud wrote: >>> I have no idea how you decided we disagree about configuration >>> files. My >>> question was about daemonizing applications, not about configuring >>> them. >>> Your configuration files are a red herring. Please read my original >>> question. >>> >> Maybe I misunderstood you when you said there is something more >> convenient >> than (re)editing a configuration file and sending a (HUP) signal >> afterwards. >> I think this is a fine way to do things. >> >> I still think I would not want too many directories for controlling and >> configuring processes. I think that is where we disagree. >>> Ansible has nothing to do with Slackware, so your comment makes no >>> sense. >>> >> I knew this would create confusion. What I meant about mentioning >> Slackware >> was that I prefer something more bare-bones and as closely adhering >> to the unix >> standard. Ansible, and my not using it, was to clearify that I do not >> work on >> the systems backend in hte way you do. You mentioned how backend >> configuration >> is done in Ansible applications and mine was a "I do not really know" >> reponse. >> >>> You seem to be saying "linux is a really well functioning OS, so we >>> shouldn't >>> make any changes to it." That is an interesting attitude. >>> >> Not true. What I said is that I prefer to not break old things that >> work well. >> I did not advocate a non-progress attitude. If something is truly >> better and >> demands that the foundation is changed, I am fearless to go for it. >> Some things >> that were changed in Linux distros I did not like, but the kernel has >> always >> been making forward progress in my opinion. >> >> >> I am sorry I was not able to help you. Carry on; this is a pointless >> discussion >> that is starting to go the wrong direction. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota >> tclug-list at mn-linux.org >> http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > > _______________________________________________ > TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list >