Regarding the use of supervision-scripts as "glue" in distributions, yes, the project was meant for that. Most - but not all of - the scripts are in working order, as I use them at home on my personal server.  If you are willing to take the time to remap the names (as needed), the scripts should work out-of-the-box.  If you have questions, need help, or get stuck, write to me and I'll do my best to give you answers.

Currently, these design problems remain:

* account name mappings that correspond to how the names are set up in the installation,
* hard coded file pathing, which is inconsistent between distributions,
* handling of device names, which are inconsistent between kernels,
* handling of "instances", where one service will be "reused" over and over (think multiple web servers of the same type on different ports),
* the "versioning problem", which I have (inadequately) described elsewhere on the mailing list.  The current design addresses this.

My personal life has been very busy, and I needed a break, so there hasn't been much movement.  Now that things are slowing, I can turn my attention to it again this summer.  I have a plan to revitalize supervision-scripts which addresses all (or most) of the listed design problems. The current plan is:

* come up with clear definitions of the problems,
* a proposal, detailing solutions step by step, which will become a design document,
* peer review of the document for inaccuracies and errors,
* close out the existing design and archive it,
* announce the old design as version 0.1, for historical interest,
* conversion of the existing design's data into new data structures, and
* finally, writing the code needed to generate the proper ./run files based on the data provided.

The first step is mostly done.  The second one is just starting.


On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Steve Litt <slitt@troubleshooters.com> wrote:
On Tue, 3 May 2016 22:41:48 -1000
Joel Roth <joelz@pobox.com> wrote:

> We're not the first people to think about supporting
> alternative init systems. There are collections of the
> init scripts already available.
>
> https://bitbucket.org/avery_payne/supervision-scripts
> https://github.com/tokiclover/supervision

Those can serve as references and starting points, but I don't think
either one is complete, and in Avery's case, that can mean you don't
know whether a given daemon's run script and environment was complete
or not. In tokiclover's case, that github page implies that the only run
scripts he had were for the gettys, and that's pretty straightforward
(and well known) anyway.

As I remember, before he had to put it aside for awhile, Avery was
working on new ways of testing whether needed daemons (like the
network) were really functional. That would have been huge.

Another source of daemon startup scripts his here:

https://universe2.us/collector/epoch.conf

SteveT

Steve Litt
April 2016 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century
http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21