From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Mon Oct 12 02:13:24 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F19C429DFD; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 02:13:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C8hzm2Llqz4n7J; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 02:13:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1602468804; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=0mbg9pbcvF72C5weHpAeg3X2FnY5pWV8MDFr92ct+Ag=; b=o9TSyX5xC8VlTSqESHNwqn+nwYcz+d/8QSEUjwvwDISOgLq9Tj9Tc6lCWuFl7RrwNlSZ7W 8DKu3F1CTgT2ZroLqfZCt6m0Cm29CkH9k5TKRUXp9H0jmzmKgJb/LyDrDobHHa7ttsd1IC mU9Z4I+PUuj5szXNUHuDViOzLThfy6DXEfRCbWGskg7Em+Oydi5pltXoUlPmF1uRlNKhht z2okHDu7jmgdzP6pct851BAqobcu7o9KXMIVFdB+2MoY965sRp30e7TvPbT7YWOFMtLUl2 HsJ8Xz2raz5L09Wd6C3pR58zmUT6Pb9+YZpiB8heqZR2qC1Gh3hI5fmkB0cjvA== Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 384F41C47E; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 02:13:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 02:13:24 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Warner Losh Cc: Kyle Evans , Toomas Soome , src-committers , svn-src-all , svn-src-head Subject: Re: svn commit: r366626 - head/sbin/reboot Message-ID: <20201012021324.GA38670@FreeBSD.org> References: <202010111040.09BAeCfg073782@repo.freebsd.org> <8601CC07-3A43-461A-915C-3CB68BADF41A@me.com> <20201011130151.GA32755@FreeBSD.org> <35355AD6-42C6-48A2-8FCF-A371A82D683A@me.com> <20201011133023.GA67893@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1602468804; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=0mbg9pbcvF72C5weHpAeg3X2FnY5pWV8MDFr92ct+Ag=; b=I4poM9WtLAMY9ZhDZBLCYYQCNPAiBymVsNiakfI0W0bytSkk4a0bX5Gshrv3YSEut9CUd4 1h/6TMPsrWOcFQYfFM1ZiC93LRJ7zRs5LeF/4K9M0RdIcSa1pp3153EMTgAbtr8SrzexK+ CS9WkBkddv9VMey2mjV8kszTZbo68eKqecLqYkSrxxC1spfMjCafDGpIxcL9SbF1tRQ2b/ zBjQRz/zjV3rd3QJ+F1/JKkr/4vMJXpIhSxyhkCIoyDyktI+NWweIiNVt4vYNl1GRVgF4B 4aKqPV+vC1wz2E2SyhwqMDphzeSyut27mXGsHLOTQ94S/SPZSoUWFz7KkPy7/g== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1602468804; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=iaf5nEmMlN2Pr7h6Q9KfgJR8WRdNk+2kUGZBOdirbuTi77NU/ViDuRHbx/UldJqSHbZAy2 fLFt96YsUBSY1s9J+iAomBVu6dHqH0Lotny6+xl+IP3+XrDes86smSSyIF2VLB/JnPq8Cj 92gjLjPcmTL1cOihR2sUu/6ogihfrfzikyLaG/n8d/gEJLIb62UJEQOoAROEbqjI/lS8gw w8ooIUtSNYHKt4LJvmnl/vSyA6Z0LEdnt1epbLr4rgQUuutPLheu/kUnV22IyQCRs+wAmg I1MyPKDrBYICnlYKS6hr3/YOkd6aOnaf0MEGXP9kniUlosd5hElN5GkZH2oNGQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 02:13:24 -0000 On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:12:43AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > ... > There were cases that were discussed when the feature went in that > required it to be removed in some failure modes for full functionality. > I don't recall if they were in the rc thread or somewhere else. You mean, literally delete the file, that is, nextboot_enable="NO" can not be enough? > And honestly, nextboot.conf is special in so many ways. We have no > unlink in the loader for UFS and no write for ZFS or MSDOS. In those What's the problem with in-place overwrite in the FAT case? > cases, the rm from rc is what you want I still don't understand how could rm be better than graceful disabling alternative configuration with nextboot_enable="NO". I most certainly do *not* like when my custom config files are being removed, especially silently. When I see nextboot_enable="NO" I know that the file had been processed, and processed by the machine, not me (since I would never add trailing space). When I don't see the file, I'd be questioning myself if I've ever added it here, or maybe I put in the wrong location. > I'm not likely to remove it, but if UFS grows unlink in the future, > this man page will need to change. Just because it's easier to implemented unlink for UFS then (over)write for ZFS? > Then again, all the loser [loader?] man pages need a complete rewrite, > or close to it. Personally I find them quite useful, except when they contradict the reality (like this time). In these cases, I'd fix them. ./danfe