From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 20 16:13:11 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB0D81065675 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:13:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from drobbins@funtoo.org) Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com (mail-wi0-f172.google.com [209.85.212.172]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 215418FC22 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:13:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wibhm11 with SMTP id hm11so1630964wib.13 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:13:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=4JPJfXX6bPCKdxyIRypWn7ElGDDHcvgCpSTesyW2biI=; b=l/5mI1Ce52m/JJBxUFvbFz0IFbiRa6/2r8Mc0NjMntr4ncUYZgPNRTBrLWIoWvlbAi 2HlyHi7p1J+CtTlgX2ichfQt9LyuHdrCrOV7PfxeASXUPL/meJ8557xzlDpYsEbxRJyM sDb0umpqrEZ4ekWNsvfUFQJozT6MmY4xf+oz4B9XFSAFdxF3JbRY4ZyDjkrXoSP99pDl ygtkDbdUDmRjAw/LeKOE+jOe0jXTCeERoU89IeR4xplv+8NDGgRbY+hrdr6P0z+spd5k 2uHa9+P9JlX+Id9KQspJHCzk1gDa8MKdeVM7+QidGadCsUTsy0fi2HnozlPYu6UQc7vM DYsw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.7.133 with SMTP id j5mr13126503wia.14.1340208789991; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:13:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.104.1 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:13:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4FDF6177.5050608@unsane.co.uk> <4FDF6586.9060501@gentoo.org> <4FDFB166.2040709@FreeBSD.org> <4FDFB44D.9090308@gentoo.org> <4FE0ADCD.9010109@FreeBSD.org> <4FE0C123.8030301@gentoo.org> <4FE0F773.1080403@gentoo.org> <4FE100F9.2050009@funtoo.org> <20120620073920.GA5300@lonesome.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:13:09 -0600 Message-ID: From: Daniel Robbins To: Wojciech Puchar Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmKN21p32jYOyIE1ZyPIUxrGiSvcXB0zbwSct95zOduN2zLMFkc84BjTNLRc4L7S4HzPsZ5 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:05:07 +0000 Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Replacing rc(8) (Was: FreeBSD Boot Times) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:13:11 -0000 On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > actually i am happy with current system, but maybe others. > > My most important ideas are: > > - any new system should not be more complex - ability to keep all flags and > main config in single file (/etc/rc.conf) must persist. I don't want mess. > And for sure not only me. > > - once again - the less files, the better. > > Some time ago i had to use linux (fortunately no longer needed). As i don't > use it normally i just took debian installer that i remembered it WAS > usable. > > After seeing the incredible complexity of /etc structure, not just rc > scripts, i deleted most of it and put startup sequence in single file. > > It was plain horror. I think our current system for OpenRC is pretty elegant. Initscripts go in /etc/init.d. Runlevels are defined as directories in /etc/runlevels. The default runlevel is /etc/runlevels/default. To add a service to a runlevel, you type "rc-update add ". To start/stop all services according to runlevel, you type "rc". To switch runlevels, you type "rc ", like "rc mobile". > yes i am. but that joke is clear suggestion that we have already tens of > thousands better or worse made ports! Well, if ports maintenance is the much bigger problem we can also look at coordinating efforts there in the future. > if you have idea how to improve existing rc.d AND make ports working as is > then go on. I think that if FreeBSD used OpenRC (maybe initially with a compatibility layer for existing initscripts) then it would make it easier for us all to transition to a compatible ports format, since we could use the same ports initscripts. Then, an nginx port could contain an initscript that could work on both FreeBSD and Gentoo/Funtoo Linux. This could definitely open up the possibility of collaborating more easily in the future on ports maintenance. But collaborating on ports is such a big topic, and initscript compatibility is a relatively minor issue in the grand scheme of things. Is the maintenance of ports a huge issue for FreeBSD, and would you be interested in looking into working with Gentoo and Funtoo on sharing build scripts? > For me it is OK. You know, I often wonder why so much effort in the Linux world is spent on the first few seconds of a system's uptime. So I definitely understand and appreciate that you are not ready to make reckless changes to your boot process. >From my perspective, the upstart/launchd/systemd/udev mess in Linux is ugly, and we are promoting OpenRC as a sane alternative. So it helps us to have other distributions and operating systems using it. Because for Gentoo and Funtoo, OpenRC *is* our standard design, and we want to promote something more "normal" than the other stuff coming from Linux. It helps us to fight that battle when we have a broader base of users. I think that is one of the motivations of reaching out to FreeBSD -- the Gentoo and Funtoo user-base is more aligned with the sensibilities of FreeBSD than the other Linux distros moving to upstart/launchd, etc. I think that may be a major benefit of FreeBSD using OpenRC -- that you will be treated as a respected and listened-to member of the OpenRC community. I don't know if you have been following some of the politics in Linux recently, but a lot of this service management stuff has been almost shoved down our throats with the justification that it's necessary for Linux dominating the desktop. (!) Best Regards, Daniel