Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 23:51:50 +0100 From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> To: Xin Li <delphij@delphij.net> Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: conf/174595: /etc/rc.d/sysctl : unknown oid ' XXX' [regression] Message-ID: <20121224225150.GA81874@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <201212242220.qBOMK0um096595@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <201212242220.qBOMK0um096595@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:20:00PM +0000, Xin Li wrote: > The following reply was made to PR conf/174595; it has been noted by GNATS. > From: Xin Li <delphij@delphij.net> > To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, olivier@gid0.org > Cc: > Subject: Re: conf/174595: /etc/rc.d/sysctl : unknown oid 'XXX' [regression] > Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 14:17:27 -0800 > It seems that the old behavior is actually wrong... How are we > benefited by not being told about fatal errors? I think the old behaviour is correct. How it used to work was that the first attempt via /etc/rc.d/sysctl start would ignore nonexistent OIDs while the second attempt via /etc/rc.d/sysctl lastload (via /etc/rc.d/securelevel) would complain about them. This way, sysctls added by modules loaded via rc.d would be harmlessly ignored the first time. The new code attempts to do this via sysctl -i but appears to have switched things around. Unknown OIDs should be ignored the first time and should not be ignored the last time, which is the opposite the code does. -- Jilles Tjoelker
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121224225150.GA81874>