From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 1 22:34:56 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B31D16A420; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 22:34:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mtm@FreeBSD.Org) Received: from terra.mike.lan (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2C3D13C458; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 22:34:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mtm@FreeBSD.Org) Received: by terra.mike.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D4B60678F3; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 01:41:16 +0300 (EAT) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 01:41:16 +0300 From: Mike Makonnen To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20071001224116.GA82760@terra.mike.lan> References: <584bfc3f0709300300s22f2606w3f2628edc1aa15f@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD/7.0-CURRENT (i386) Cc: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rc.d cleanup patch redux 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: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 22:34:56 -0000 On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 02:13:36PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > On Sun, 30 Sep 2007, Mike Telahun Makonnen wrote: > > >> > >>3. Remove the comment from named_flags, to match all the other empty > >>_flags variables *grumble* > > > >I don't understand what the purpose of all those empty foo_flags="" > >variables is. > > I put in a commented out example for named so that users would know that > it's a knob which is available for them to twiddle. > > >Maybe for 8-CURRENT we can get rid of them from etc/defaults/rc.conf? > > Personally I'd rather comment them out, but I'm open to suggestions. Well, I was more concerned with bloat of /etc/defaults/rc.conf. I would prefer to just remove them all and replace them with a generic man page entry, but: mtm@terra ~% grep '^[a-z,0-9]*_flags=""' /etc/defaults/rc.conf | wc -l 33 so I guess it's not that important. > >I'm not sure about the usefullness of these. If all the daemon needs is > >a simple kill -TERM, then I believe init already takes care of this. A > >script > >should make use of the shutdown keyword only if it needs to do additional > >processing. For example, rc.d/amd doesn't do anything special on > >shutdown. It just lets rc.subr(8) glue send a -TERM signal. The only > >benefit I see to adding the shutdown keyword to these kinds of scripts > >is that the shutdown occurs in reverse order of startup (as opposed to > >init just killing them off all at once after rc.shutdown). > > Yeah, that's the main benefit I had in mind. I also have a sort of gut > feeling that doing this would be a good practice to adopt, and can lead to > other benefits down the road, but I could be wrong. > > Any other opinions? > > >This change only adds aditional processing during shutdown without any > >real benefit. > > I don't see any measurable increase in processing time, but my laptop is > still on the fastish side. It's just that this little chage adds a little extra processig time here, that change adds just a little extra there, etc... and before you know it they all add up to a big difference (especially if we don't use faststop like des suggested). I'm not really against this change, I just wanted to voice my reservations. In fact, I would be more comfortable with leaving this last part of the change until after the code-freeze since it's also likely to introduce more "foo is not running?" console spammage. Cheers, Mike.