Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 10:05:18 +0200 From: Florent Thoumie <flz@xbsd.org> To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Including PREFIX/etc/rc.d/* scripts in the system's rcorder for startup in 6.0-Release Message-ID: <4E8A0437-C953-4910-AC96-BEBA66EA333B@xbsd.org> In-Reply-To: <42A8B4E6.9090401@FreeBSD.org> References: <42A8B4E6.9090401@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 9, 2005, at 11:30 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > Howdy, > > I realize that this is pretty short notice before the release, but > the rc.d > team just got a spiffy new volunteer to do the legwork on this, and > so we're > going to try to beat the code freeze/slushie deadline for 6.0. What > we've > been discussing for the last few days on the freebsd-rc list is a > two-fold > approach in order to avoid needing a flag day to cover this issue. > > The first part of the approach is to hack /etc/rc.d/localpkg to use > rcorder > to handle the keywords that are already in the scripts with *.sh > filename > patterns. This will preserve the lexical ordering that exists now, > while > giving port authors (and users of course) the ability to start using > keywords with existing scripts that fit the *.sh pattern. > > Part two of this proposal is to hack on /etc/rc to use rcorder on any > scripts in PREFIX/etc/rc.d that DON'T use the *.sh filename > pattern, but DO > include a new keyword (that will be specified). In this way, port > authors > and users can start opting into the new system at their > convenience. Once > the new system has been in place "long enough," we can drop > processing for > the special key word, and just handle all rc.d scripts the same, > regardless > of their location. That's nothing new, eik was already working on this some months ago. That still remains a good idea. > This may sound more complicated than it needs to be, but the > discussion on > the freebsd-rc list brought up a lot of interesting cases that need > to be > considered as part of this transition, and I believe we've > simplified it as > much as possible. My question at this point is, does this approach > sound > reasonable? Our intention is to coordinate this closely with y'all > so that > we don't do something that will break the new release, or more > importantly > break backwards computability. Well, code slush is today, release won't happen until things are fixed btw. That means fixing bsd.port.mk to alter USE_RC_SUBR and USE_RCORDER to fit this new model, it won't take long. The only thing that could break are bogus rcNG scripts with bad PROVIDES/REQUIRES statements. -- Florent Thoumie flz@xbsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E8A0437-C953-4910-AC96-BEBA66EA333B>