daemondo defeats purpose of launchd?

[markd at macports.org]

Blair Zajac <blair at orcaware.com> writes:
>Looks good Mark.
>
>It doesn't explain why one would use launchd or daemondo.  Is this the 
>appropriate place to put it, or is it described elsewhere?

Hi Blair,

Yes you're right it doesn't say, and this would be the appropriate place. 
Fact is, I'm not sure the answer.  James' original notes said that
startupitem.executable was the preferred type, but it didn't say why.  If
daemondo doesn't monitor and restart daemons, as I guess it can't since it
only knows about scripts, then perhaps that is the reason.  But since so
many apps just have startup scripts that don't monitor and restart their
daemons, it seems odd to call it the "preferred type" since if that is to
be done whenever possible (even when developers provide startup scripts),
we'd be establishing a higher standard with ports than the developers who
created the programs consider necessary.  So I wonder if the "why"
question doesn't come down to:

1) If a port author wants the daemon monitored and restarted if it dies,
use an executable startupitem type.

2) Otherwise, use a wrapper type (daemondo) startup script if the
developer provided a startup script that works ok on the target platform
and the deamon isn't unstable for some reason.

3) If the developer didn't provide a startup script or one that works ok
on the target platform, you may use either executable or wrapper
startupitem types.  Unless we can establish executable startupitems are
*really* the preferred type for MacPorts, then the advice is: executable
if possilble and wrapper if not.

If I can arrive at some answers on this I can clarify that section.
>
>Also, for startupitem.pidfile, the default is shown as
>
>Default: none | ${prefix}/var/run/${name}.pid
>
>is one for launchd and the other for daemondo?

No and I struggled on that one because the startupitem.pidfile keyword has
two separate values: one specifies the pid handling behavior, the other
the pidfile path.  So there are two defaults for the one keyword.  Also,
since the keyword is of a type "executable", it cannot be used with
wrapper startupitems.

"Executable StartupItem keywords may not be used together with any of the
wrapper StartupItem keywords."

But that should be stated clearly in the intro to the topic, but it isn't
so it is easily missed.  I can make it all more clear and I will do that. 
Hopefully others will know the answer to the first question and whether
executable startupitem types are truly "preferred".  Your feedback is
helpful; thanks a lot.

Mark