Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2010 11:41:27 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r204759 - in head: etc/defaults etc/rc.d share/man/man5 Message-ID: <4B92AFE7.4040200@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20100306162535.000078b8@unknown> References: <201003051434.o25EYXBR024375@svn.freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1003052113350.98935@serrsnyy.serrofq.bet> <20100306162535.000078b8@unknown>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3/6/2010 7:25 AM, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 21:18:00 +0000 (UTC) Doug Barton<dougb@FreeBSD.org> > wrote: > >> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >> >>> Author: netchild >>> Date: Fri Mar 5 14:34:33 2010 >>> New Revision: 204759 >>> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/204759 >> >> I've got no comments on the jail-related stuff given that my >> knowledge of jails is almost non-existent. However I wish you had run >> your diff past freebsd-rc@ since if you had I (or someone else) could >> have let you know that the attached patch is a much cleaner way of >> implementing the bit about conditionalizing "parallel" execution >> (which, to the extent I understand the problem I agree with your >> solution of only doing it at when starting, FWIW). >> >> In general we try to avoid having any code in rc.d scripts run >> unconditionally. In this case it's harmless (although every cpu cycle >> counts) but in other cases it can cause problems, which is why as a >> general rule it's safer to avoid it altogether. > > I assume your version covers onestart, forcestart faststart and start > (I can imagine situations where a prestart should be different from a > preforcestart, but I doubt we differentiate in the code). The label to start is stripped in rc.subr (and a variable is set to indicate that it was present) before we get to processing start_precmd. > The reason why I chose the case was, that forcestart and onestart are > more interactive options. I could imagine that someone tells in the > future that it may be better to ignore the jail_parallel_start in those > cases. Can the one/force part be detected in the prestart? It could (by testing for the variable) but I would be resistant to the idea of overloading it like that. It's hard enough to get people to understand onestart as it is, I don't want to confuse them by having it do "magic" for one particular service. > The trick with command_args is neat, but it is a pitfall in case > someone wants to use it in the future. Wouldn't it be better to add the > ampersand to it instead of letting the ampersand replace the value? Yes, obviously if someone wants to use command_args for an additional purpose down the road changes will have to be made. It's not in use atm however, so IMO simpler is better. > Whatever your answers are, feel free to change what you want to change > (as long as the feature remains... my main concern is to solve the bugs, > not how to solve them). Okey dokey, thanks. :) Doug -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4B92AFE7.4040200>