From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 5 22:42:51 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 744BC1065672 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 22:42:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nlandys@gmail.com) Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com (mu-out-0910.google.com [209.85.134.187]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1FAF8FC0C for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 22:42:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nlandys@gmail.com) Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i2so142160mue.3 for ; Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:42:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=WLU2d3xw5cziySW2astxGYNlaTomysp3P22W2CYklRE=; b=DrXfeG9mT7zfZwc1wQ0KmVQuWB1i42cpjt4HTmUx2R2OXOEoKs4hrD49D2ygXLocVo tnKy8YW8qzwa1/KH9Mb1TcB9e1o0MLlXxdrXTvm2yrgKlRaz4qzFC8YgU0wGO/HfQvsz PCOhWTFvazbvL201ZcpbAhmRWYCMdwp/REtHs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=MTrCy2zSL/xPs0JHoIJVcv8VNHC8YRAG7zCqk76CS+vPX0tiULTdsQwhH+JSlfJ6fS S0I5fsVFbnuapUWS57MuAdQM0hko0vXYh82fIt9mnb1PVxzQ0uU18ogfGGYp4Livvl6/ jKqvOOWlxWLmAaYQCIODMrfyYqYlxD8sOYQ+c= Received: by 10.181.55.2 with SMTP id h2mr169707bkk.52.1228516969497; Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:42:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.180.240.16 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Dec 2008 14:42:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <560f92640812051442y4263b70and059c0a6e6177cd9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 14:42:49 -0800 From: "Nerius Landys" To: RW In-Reply-To: <20081205221113.6084e635@gumby.homeunix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <560f92640811211647q551daccnaec4e8085bb8e042@mail.gmail.com> <20081205190703.0dfb952d@gumby.homeunix.com> <560f92640812051322h520ac67ficebbc3881907fbc2@mail.gmail.com> <20081205221113.6084e635@gumby.homeunix.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: named and ntpd start order in rc.d X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 22:42:51 -0000 > That's not correct. BEFORE and REQUIRE are used by rcorder to > determine the ordering of the scripts without checking if they are > enabled. Actually all scripts get run - if you don't enable ntpdate then > rc.d/ntpdate still runs, but doesn't do anything. My mistake. But then I don't understand why enabling ntpdate in rc.conf fixed my problem of ntpd's DNS resolver child process not completing (returning). My guess was that NETWORK and named were guaranteed getting run before ntpd if I included ntpdate in rc.conf. I thought that perhaps NETWORK and named were not getting run before ntpd in my particular case when I didn't include ntpdate in rc.conf. But according to your information NETWORK and named scripts would get run before the ntpd script no matter if ntpdate was enabled in rc.conf or not (because NETWORK and named are required by ntpdate and ntpdate is required by ntpd). So why did enabling ntpdate in rc.conf fix my problem?