Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:09:11 +0900 From: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@FreeBSD.org> To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r200743 - in head/usr.sbin: . service Message-ID: <ygebphuceaw.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> In-Reply-To: <4B2DBB51.9060002@FreeBSD.org> References: <200912200134.nBK1YCAA048942@svn.freebsd.org> <yged42ackpc.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <4B2DBB51.9060002@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
>>>>> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 21:51:13 -0800
>>>>> Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> said:
dougb> Other than the removal of "exit $?" I'm not necessarily opposed to
dougb> that idea, but I'm wondering what value this change would have in the
dougb> "system is already up and running" case (when it will be executed) vs.
dougb> at boot time (such as in /etc/rc where the code is copied from).
I don't just remove "exit $?". Since the script is kicked by "exec",
the return value from the script is returned to the process which
kicked service(8), directly.
About the value this change, I think it should be same as the values
at boot time. I cannot imagine that someone want to restart the
system daemons under the user environment. Even if someone want to do
so, he still can kick /etc/rc.d/foo, directly.
Further, it seems service(8) does similar thing on CentOS.
Sincerely,
--
Hajimu UMEMOTO @ Internet Mutual Aid Society Yokohama, Japan
ume@mahoroba.org ume@{,jp.}FreeBSD.org
http://www.imasy.org/~ume/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ygebphuceaw.wl%ume>