startupitem.inetdcompat or newbie base hacking!

James Berry jberry at
Sun Apr 22 16:24:33 PDT 2007

Hi Chris,

On Apr 22, 2007, at 2:17 PM, Chris Pickel wrote:

> While we're on the subject of StartupItems/LaunchDaemons, I had a  
> quick question as well: is there any reason startup is always  
> passed through daemondo? I understand that, in some cases, it's the  
> only viable option. However, in others, I know of no reason this is  
> necessary. I've been using launchd directly with lighttpd, mysql5,  
> and ccxstream for some time with no adverse affects; see:

Yes, there are certainly cases where we don't need daemondo in the  
loop. If the executable option is given, for instance, we know that  
we can safely use launchd to directly execute the application.

> Is there some way of providing support for this alternate type of  
> startup item to Tiger installations? It's not that important now,  
> though it would be necessary if, for example, lighttpd were ever to  
> support launchd-style port selection.
> (It's perfectly understandable if the answer is, "we'll think about  
> it when Leopard comes out and we only target launchd")

Yes, when leopard finally roars it will be much easier to extend and  
enhance the startup items support without also having to worry about  
keeping the legacy system starter items going.


More information about the macports-dev mailing list