This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Oct 28 13:41, Habermann, Dave (DA) wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com [mailto:cygwin-owner@cygwin.com] On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 5:27 PM > To: cygwin@cygwin.com > Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] TEST RELEASE: Cygwin 1.7.33-0.1 > > On Oct 27 18:35, Habermann, Dave (DA) wrote: > > >> Question: In the documentation you indicate that "If cygserver is > >> running it will provide passwd and group entry caching for all > >> processes in every Cygwin process tree started after cygserver." > >> Normally I have several processes (specifically sshd, cygserver, cron > >> and httpd2) automatically start up as services when my system boots > >> up, and I have not specified the order. Would it now be desirable to > >> have cygserver starting up first, followed by the others? If so, what > >> would be the preferred way to create such a dependency/startup timing? > >> Would a service dependency be sufficient? > > >Now that you mention it... yes, a service dependency might be helpful. > >Unfortunately it's tricky to automate this. Is it possible to add > >service deps after having installed a service? > > According to > http://serverfault.com/questions/24821/how-to-add-dependency-on-a-windows-service-after-the-service-is-installed > it is possible to add a dependency to an already existing service. I > agree it would be hard to automate in the install scripts, as one > would have to either ask the user about their intent to run other > services or rely that they configured cygserver first and then check > to see if it has been already configured to determine if a dependency > should be created. I would think that some instructions in the docs > near the statement mentioned above would be more than sufficient, > since this is a "fine tuning" sort of thing. Agreed. Do you have some idea how to phrase this? I'd be grateful for a nice two or three paragraphs discussing this. Thanks, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
Attachment:
pgpUaHCTnMkWy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |