From owner-svn-src-stable@freebsd.org Mon Apr 9 16:10:10 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E28EF8BD91; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:10:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from byond.lenox@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lf0-f41.google.com (mail-lf0-f41.google.com [209.85.215.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70B2B7603A; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:10:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from byond.lenox@gmail.com) Received: by mail-lf0-f41.google.com with SMTP id m200-v6so7381860lfm.4; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:10:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=V1k5M3IzMOcDcP7hplQt9EJnvkDe/G7uDiDmQ9VqB8o=; b=Jov5uyWnHVTjtNCQWf8WWeQfn7I8DPkKWK8CFaWfw6Te6c5MeiWLsjJwRaFMJ7ivIA aNTI2PLgnuPaJ9JoNb/X9H6XBIq+sAgP83IlvnSs4T97HHKguBrTbTkare6Wspxw6hnN smN6lQuc2ETX9wpt6yfgujrKq9dUUp99rG0q3ApS2XSlYoB3KfttOSIi57aZN/vuPGCw 9aXRhDHyR/8htBgA1BFyT6ktTfMflO4GzjEZ5vmJKn+kXhNuopWhpMOgx7Knix8sURxQ iaRWqGFvLKLDBKkACJGQU3LdWQgUW135xq0G4k1Li3imlhp5L1XA6Bmc25CJ1pqo/mfY Fs9w== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7Hp66BJSWvMavt28vLVYmVKpM7h7qFo6VRtazhJZmF+OnyK6UgT +irCZ8X5tVFlRRttFkIGRr4iHbgL X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/64mYgxj0K0efYlgJHvweMDdrlxingsQSg2NaUn5AJydn4DBKg3B6tLoTTaZOJdXEqTZHgbA== X-Received: by 10.46.154.71 with SMTP id k7mr22680759ljj.42.1523290207211; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:10:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf0-f44.google.com (mail-lf0-f44.google.com. [209.85.215.44]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r6sm124184ljh.55.2018.04.09.09.10.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:10:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf0-f44.google.com with SMTP id c78-v6so7372242lfh.1; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:10:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a19:c4c8:: with SMTP id u191-v6mr23216084lff.109.1523290206852; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:10:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.129.90 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:09:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201804091552.w39Fqv2S019416@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <201804091552.w39Fqv2S019416@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> From: Kyle Evans Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 11:09:46 -0500 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r331880 - stable/11/etc To: "Rodney W. Grimes" Cc: Niclas Zeising , svn-src-stable@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers , svn-src-stable-11@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: svn-src-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for all the -stable branches of the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2018 16:10:10 -0000 On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 10:52 AM, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Rodney W. Grimes >> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Rodney W. Grimes >> >> wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:46 AM, Rodney W. Grimes >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 04/02/18 17:39, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Author: kevans >> >> >> >> >> Date: Mon Apr 2 15:28:48 2018 >> >> >> >> >> New Revision: 331880 >> >> >> >> >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/331880 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Log: >> >> >> >> >> MFC r328331: Support configuring arbitrary limits(1) for any rc.conf daemon >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Usage is ${name}_limits, and the argument is any flags accepted by >> >> >> >> >> limits(1), such as `-n 100' (e.g. only allow 100 open files). >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Modified: >> >> >> >> >> stable/11/etc/rc.subr >> >> >> >> >> Directory Properties: >> >> >> >> >> stable/11/ (props changed) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Modified: stable/11/etc/rc.subr >> >> >> >> >> ============================================================================== >> >> >> >> >> --- stable/11/etc/rc.subr Mon Apr 2 15:07:41 2018 (r331879) >> >> >> >> >> +++ stable/11/etc/rc.subr Mon Apr 2 15:28:48 2018 (r331880) >> >> >> >> >> @@ -773,6 +773,8 @@ check_startmsgs() >> >> >> >> >> # >> >> >> >> >> # ${name}_login_class n Login class to use, else "daemon". >> >> >> >> >> # >> >> >> >> >> +# ${name}_limits n limits(1) to apply to ${command}. >> >> >> >> >> +# >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > Caution, limits(1) is in /usr/bin, this code can fail if used before >> >> >> >> > /usr is mounted. (Ie, our rc.initdiskless) is probably broken by >> >> >> >> > this change if a call is made to limits. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sorry for jumping on this so late. This is also an issue in CURRENT, >> >> >> >> and has been since at least 2016. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I was aware that it was an issue and why I made a comment about it >> >> >> > being MFC'ed. Though I had forgot a bug report existed. >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm kind of surprised we haven't had more complaints about this- the >> >> >> original commit for this stuff landed before stable/11 was even >> >> >> branched, so it's been broken for all of 11.x's lifetime. >> >> > >> >> > History has taught me it takes a long time for this type of >> >> > breakage to usually surface in a noticable way. Also I think >> >> > until you merged this last ${name}_limits thing it actually >> >> > didn't cause an issue, except for the few like me running >> >> > diskless systems and or seperate /usr. >> >> >> >> I don't see how this merge could possibly have been the cause of any >> >> claimed issues- like I said before, it didn't add any limits >> >> invocations, it added an arg to the limits invocation that already >> >> existed. You can see this pretty clearly from the diff, we didn't even >> >> change any conditions for limits to be invoked. >> > >> > limits_mysql="NO" is defined by the startup script for mysql, >> > that now causes /etc/rc to try and use that variable in a >> > different way. >> > >> > You added a variable, one that was already in use by some other >> > /etc/rc* related component. Collision of differening uses is >> > causing errors. >> > >> >> Ah, apologies, I misread your previous e-mail and had interpreted it >> as you claiming again that this broke things for those of you "running >> diskless systems and or seperate /usr." -- this other breakage, these >> are things we can fix and aren't really large hurdles to climb over. > > Mostly true, other than the hurdle of that 0mp mentions in his > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227205 > We need to remember that we cannot simply switch to > the new mechanism as it is only available in 12-CURRENT > and soon in 11-STABLE (and 11.2). > > I am not sure how to handle that with the users, it is a operational > interface change in how limits are done for these ports and probably > is going to break a lot of peoples systems if they try to update > from 11.1 to 11.2 because there /etc/rc.conf file is full of old > stuff that this new stuff is incompatible with. > > IMHO, it would be best to post pone this change to 12, as people > are more willing to suffer painful upgrades when going between > major versions. > Right- so, back out this MFC (and the subsequent FreeBSD_version bump) and fix the ports to do the right thing for 12.x while that's still not a technically supported branch? >> >> We just need people like 0mp that are actually inclined to address it >> in ports, and we need to actually communicate changes like this with >> ports people and assess what's going to break and make a plan to get >> it fixed. > > Problem was/is no one had the foresight to see the ports breakage > coming and avoid it in some way. That happens, its engineering, > lets find a fix and move on. > >> IMO this in particular wasn't a major change, and it shouldn't have >> been too big of a deal (unlike the commit that it built upon). I don't >> think it should've been broken in head for two months in the various >> ports that 0mp has identified- even if people don't run these >> databases on head, we should've assessed the fallout and fixed it >> somewhere in the two month's time. We're not talking half the ports >> tree, we're talking < 30 ports. =( > > Its usually the tiny, minor, itty bit little nit change that bites > the hardest :-) >