From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 12 00:21:59 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12AD71065679 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 00:21:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.dyndns.org) Received: from qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.16]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAB1C8FC13 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 00:21:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta16.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.72]) by qmta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 5cFE1f0011ZMdJ4A1cMyFi; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 00:21:58 +0000 Received: from koitsu.dyndns.org ([98.248.41.155]) by omta16.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 5cMx1f0043LrwQ28ccMxeG; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 00:21:58 +0000 Received: by icarus.home.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 010939B423; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:21:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 17:21:56 -0700 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: Wesley Shields Message-ID: <20100912002156.GA995@icarus.home.lan> References: <20100911222902.bb57444a.nork@FreeBSD.org> <20100911173359.68d71af6@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <20100912000928.GA9073@atarininja.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100912000928.GA9073@atarininja.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: jpaetzel@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org, Ion-Mihai Tetcu , Norikatsu Shigemura Subject: Re: [ports/net/isc-dhcp*] Don't stop DHCP related daemons X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 00:21:59 -0000 On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 08:09:28PM -0400, Wesley Shields wrote: > On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 05:33:59PM +0300, Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > > On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 22:29:02 +0900 > > Norikatsu Shigemura wrote: > > > > > Hi wxs and jpaetzel. > > > > > > I noticed that dhcpd server stoped after portupgrade, > > > sometimes. It's a painful accident on my network. Because I didn't > > > notice some troubles:-(. > > > > > > Why do you stop the daemons? Is it really absolutely necessary > > > to stop a service before it's files go away? > > > > > > SEE ALSO: > > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/rc-scripts.html#AEN5402 > > > > > > $ grep forcestop isc-dhcp*/pkg-plist > > > isc-dhcp31-relay/pkg-plist:@unexec %D/etc/rc.d/isc-dhcrelay.sh > > > forcestop 2>/dev/null || true isc-dhcp31-relay/pkg-plist:@unexec > > > %D/etc/rc.d/isc-dhcrelay forcestop 2>/dev/null || true > > > isc-dhcp31-server/pkg-plist:@unexec %D/etc/rc.d/isc-dhcpd.sh > > > forcestop 2>/dev/null || true isc-dhcp31-server/pkg-plist:@unexec > > > %D/etc/rc.d/isc-dhcpd forcestop 2>/dev/null || true > > > isc-dhcp41-relay/pkg-plist:@unexec %D/etc/rc.d/isc-dhcrelay.sh > > > forcestop 2>/dev/null || true isc-dhcp41-relay/pkg-plist:@unexec > > > %D/etc/rc.d/isc-dhcrelay forcestop 2>/dev/null || true > > > isc-dhcp41-server/pkg-plist:@unexec %D/etc/rc.d/isc-dhcpd forcestop > > > 2>/dev/null || true > > > > > > I want to remove these lines in pkg-plist. > > > > This 'stop the service before we install' seems to be a new fashion, > > usually unneeded/disruptive. > > IMO this should only happen when it's really needed, and with some big > > warning printed. > > This is there because that is how the old ISC ports were done. I'm not a > fan of this at all. If it doesn't break upgrades I'm going to remove it. > > Ports/packages should keep their grubby little hands off my services. ;) This "problem" affects more than just ISC-related ports. It's scattered all over many, and probably for a good reason. Has anyone taken the time to actually study how the daemon behaves in all possible circumstances if you pull certain files out from underneath it? Meaning, pkg_delete might delete/clean up something that the daemon relies upon. For example, with regards to isc-dhcp, has anyone checked the implications of removing the files it does with the daemon still running? Have they tested such with all configuration (e.g. LDAP in use)? For example, I know that with postfix if you let the daemon remain running when pkg_delete'ing the software, it starts freaking out whenever any mail I/O happens. And what about ports like mysqlXX-server? You get my point. I'm actually in favour of having ports ***not*** touch services at all, but I want to be absolutely sure people aren't jumping the gun claiming "oh it's totally safe" when there's a good chance it might not be. But to play devil's advocate once again: this discussion started because the OP uninstalled or upgraded a port which made use of a daemon, which was (possibly rightfully so) shut down during pkg_delete, and he forgot to restart the daemon. No offence intended, but what administrator upgrades software (a service nonetheless) and then walks away from his computer? Please think about that for a while too, and ask yourself if catering to this mentality through software (ports framework) is a good idea. -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB |