Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:17:42 -0600
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org>, Toomas Soome <tsoome@me.com>,  src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>,  svn-src-head <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r366626 - head/sbin/reboot
Message-ID:  <CANCZdfr49FPdOQQ3-rQwEKC4HrkqZVOUu2gCWgO4NKTKrOsx3A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <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> <CACNAnaH%2BocNxvkXiiqa_13RRf5oT9O0jTjik2gw_83WHStXTeA@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfpL0ajtSjFYj-5p3Si_vsV-4Q_qHkNY8oaVDsZ%2BZwQcLg@mail.gmail.com> <20201012021324.GA38670@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 11, 2020, 8:13 PM Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> wrote:

> 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?
>

Yes. Sometimes it's not reliably written in some failure scenarios. In
those cases it must be deleted.

> 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?
>

Last I checked, it wasn't implemented. It could be done, but hasn't been.

> 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"<space> 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.
>

Nextboot.conf is special. It will be deleted. It doesn't belong to you, it
belongs to nextboot(8).

> 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?
>

Both are hard in ZFS. Unlink has issues that I hadn't recalled, so that
path is unlikely...

> 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.
>

For now, it's fine.

Warner

>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfr49FPdOQQ3-rQwEKC4HrkqZVOUu2gCWgO4NKTKrOsx3A>