Date: Sat, 01 May 2010 09:38:31 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: nfe0 startup Message-ID: <4BDBE887.7020505@infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20100501101513.64204bb6.robertjenssen@ozemail.com.au> References: <20100501101513.64204bb6.robertjenssen@ozemail.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 01/05/2010 01:15:13, Robert Jenssen wrote:
> Many thanks to those who responded to my question. It seems that
> waiting for the network to start up is a common problem. Recently
> Jeremy Chadwick proprosed adding a /usr/local/etc/rc.d/waitnetwork
> script. In response others have suggested the more radical step of
> replacing /etc/rc.d with launchd. See Message-ID
> <20100418213727.GA98129@icarus.home.lan> etc. I will await
> developments.
launchd(8) is a very interesting proposition, but it replaces a lot more
than just the RC framework. It also covers cron(8), devd(8), inetd(8),
init(8)/getty(8). Unlike RC scripts, launchd does /not/ expect the
programs it manages to daemonise. In that respect, it's a lot more like
daemontools or the sysV-ish inittab. While this has advantages (eg. in
being able to restart crashed daemons promptly), it's a very different
way of doing things, and there would have to be concomitant changes all
over /usr/src. Not forgetting all of the available ported software.
By my estimation, if FreeBSD were to commit to using launchd(8), the
work required would absorb the majority of the available developer time
running up to a major release. ie. if the decision was taken to go
ahead, as soon as 9.0-RELEASE was branched, work on launchd in
10-CURRENT would have to start immediately, and take priority over many
other development efforts in order to have the following 10.0-RELEASE
up to the quality expected from the FreeBSD project.
I don't think that's going to happen. I can see a launchd-esque system
being introduced, but it would have to be radically rewritten compared
to what MacOS X uses, offer compatibility shims for all of the systems
it was intended to supplant, and it would take many years of gradual
developent and change to get it to the desired state.
In other words, keep up your RC script-writing skills for the
foreseeable future.
Cheers,
Matthew
- --
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
Kent, CT11 9PW
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkvb6IYACgkQ8Mjk52CukIy8KwCglf3zwHd0G28UOUgHcUi0lSz4
eGgAni89VMuk6zknVBJRDcqzfPzHbkfB
=7+ik
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4BDBE887.7020505>