From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 02:04:07 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C283F16A41F for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:04:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: from relay.rdsnet.ro (gimli.rdsnet.ro [193.231.236.70]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B47A643D66 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:04:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: (qmail 662 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2005 02:04:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.rdsnet.ro) (62.231.74.130) by smtp1-133.rdsnet.ro with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 02:04:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 22131 invoked by uid 89); 17 Dec 2005 02:03:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO it.buh.tecnik93.com) (81.196.204.98) by 0 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 02:03:57 -0000 Received: from it.buh.tecnik93.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by it.buh.tecnik93.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AADF4B80C; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 04:03:49 +0200 (EET) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 04:03:48 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20051217040348.087f1248@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <43A36F14.1050804@FreeBSD.org> References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> <20051217031024.60912c94@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36C4F.4010005@FreeBSD.org> <20051217034304.5ed69ef1@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36F14.1050804@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.100 (GTK+ 2.8.8; i386-portbld-freebsd6.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, "Simon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:04:07 -0000 On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:51:16 -0800 Doug Barton wrote: > Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:39:27 -0800 > > Doug Barton wrote: > > > >> Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > >> > >>> Better use: > >>> USE_RC_SUBR= ike > >>> and put the script in files/ike.in > >>> > >>> Currently this will perform some substitutions on the script > >>> (PREFEIX, etc.) and install it as ike.sh > >> Thanks for that, I wasn't aware that a .in vs. .sh.in was already > >> working :) > > > > Now: > > USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh > > USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name.sh > > Then: > > USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh > > USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name > > > > Is this not what we want ? > > For the Now part, yes. For the Then part, the important factor is > whether the system is past the local_startup MFC or not. If not, then > we always want to install as name.sh, otherwise the script won't run. > If so, then we want to install as just name. There is also the factor > of how to deal with a port that has a legitimate need to install as > name.sh in the post MFC world, which would mean (after all the ports > are fixed) that its boot script gets sourced into the rc environment, > rather than run in a subshell. I'd organize Then like this: > > Pre-MFC system: > USE_RC_SUBR= * --> name.sh > Post-MFC system: > USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name (this will be the common case) > USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh > > Make sense? Yes, that's what I (wanted to) say. ("my" then = post-MFC, post-fix_ports). Pav's PR will get us support for this in bsd.port.mk, the rest is fixing the ports to be rc.d compatible and repo-copies. -- IOnut - Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" Mail server hit by UniSpammer