Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:58:14 -0700
From:      Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>
To:        Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org>
Cc:        "freebsd-rc@freebsd.org" <freebsd-rc@freebsd.org>, wblock@freebsd.org, "bug-followup@freebsd.org" <bug-followup@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: bin/165477: [rc] dhclient is run twice
Message-ID:  <1353250694.1217.321.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>
In-Reply-To: <CADLo83-aCxHvsPs9Fjax8JrERTEh0o9mwikb-rRWm3ZkwxfZ2Q@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <201211021111.qA2BBHEi008211@freefall.freebsd.org> <20121118.075956.2090347175828215059.hrs@allbsd.org> <CADLo83-aCxHvsPs9Fjax8JrERTEh0o9mwikb-rRWm3ZkwxfZ2Q@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2012-11-18 at 14:40 +0000, Chris Rees wrote:
> On 17 November 2012 22:59, Hiroki Sato <hrs@freebsd.org> wrote:
> >
> >  I think it is safe to remove the warning message when rc_quiet=YES.
> >  What do you think about the attached patch?
> 
> I had originally considered that, but it then makes dhclient behave
> differently from other scripts; nothing else respects rc_quiet in this
> fashion;
> 
> from rc.subr:
>                 start)
>                         if [ -z "$rc_fast" -a -n "$rc_pid" ]; then
>                                 echo 1>&2 "${name} already running?
> (pid=$rc_pid)."
>                                 return 1
>                         fi
> and
> 
> [crees@pegasus]~/workspace/ports/musicpd% sudo service musicpd quietstart
> musicpd already running? (pid=83847).
> 
> Chris

If not via the rc_quiet mechanism, then please silence it via some other
mechanism *to restore historical behavior*.  

In the past, rc.d/dhclient had its own silent pidfile check and in
general the design was to be silently idempotent (presumably because of
the way it gets invoked multiple times for the same inteface during rc
processing).  Somewhere along the line it was changed to use new common
rc.subr code to handle the pidfile check, but because the new code is
not silent it wasn't really equivelent to the old code.

As far as I'm concerned the switch to the new noisy pidfile check for
dhclient amounts to the introduction of a bug.  If it doesn't get
changed I can see years of explaining to customers (who seem to have
nothing better to do than spelunk system logs) "don't worry about that,
it's normal."

-- Ian





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1353250694.1217.321.camel>