Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 08:58:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc/rc.d early.sh Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.0.9999.0710110850090.12203@qbhto.arg> In-Reply-To: <86odf615j2.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <200710090730.l997UEEF042804@repoman.freebsd.org> <20071010002930.GA91077@dragon.NUXI.org> <20071010183542.GA58383@hub.freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.0.9999.0710101744420.8687@qbhto.arg> <86odf615j2.fsf@ds4.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
--0-1220617959-1192118307=:12203
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> writes:
>> I'm not opposed to that idea (in fact I seriously considered it) but
>> the reason I didn't do it is that I don't have a good sense of why we
>> need it. Once again as Mike pointed out, the reason that it was there,
>> and the reason it was .sh was specifically to do what we're now trying
>> to avoid, since whatever benefits there may have been don't outweigh
>> the risks.
>
> So you remove functionality that others depend on simply because you
> don't understand it and / or don't need it yourself?
Um, no. That's not at all what I said, and I don't appreciate you
mischaracterizing what I did say. Also, please keep in mind that I'm not
suggesting we remove it until RELENG_8 branches, so we have plenty of time
to find the right answer here.
> You didn't even bother to ask on freebsd-rc.
It was discussed there at the time that I added support for local scripts
in the overall boot order. The period of time between now and then is
longer than I would have liked, but life happens.
>> I was unaware of the use of this script suggested in gmirror(8) until
>> Dmitry pointed it out to me, and that usage should really be converted
>> to a proper rc.d script.
>
> It's not the kind of thing that lends itself well to being formalized in
> that manner.
I disagree with you on that, and I plan to submit a script that does what
I have in mind for the people familiar with gmirror to test.
> This is precisely why we have rc.early and rc.local: so people who have
> special (perhaps one-off) needs can do special (perhaps one-off) things
> without jumping through too many hoops.
No one is suggesting removing rc.local, and I would vigorously oppose
doing so.
As I said in my last message, if users respond to the deprecation warning
with a request not to remove it, we can convert it to being a regular rc.d
script. That way it's only a little dangerous instead of being super
dangerous and potentially fatal.
I can't help but think that you're having a knee-jerk reaction to
something that at the end of the day is not that big of a deal. I would
suggest that perhaps taking a step back and gaining some perspective might
be a useful exercise at this point.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
--0-1220617959-1192118307=:12203--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.0.9999.0710110850090.12203>