Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 06:16:31 +0100 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: tak.official@gmail.com Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: rcorder issue Message-ID: <20131101061631.2a9adb81.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <CAPkyVLyOo=9rJSO6gxo34tt3RKCtc6=B%2BCRqBPEHX0Y9QoXP_A@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAPkyVLzPxTogxNceRu3Ow3Vv=n%2BFZzG7ZdX738qz08zr-a2uFA@mail.gmail.com> <20131031092922.bd60f4bd.freebsd@edvax.de> <CAPkyVLyOo=9rJSO6gxo34tt3RKCtc6=B%2BCRqBPEHX0Y9QoXP_A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:17:33 +0330, takCoder wrote: > Thank you for your quick and complete reply :) I'm happy to be a helpful support drone. :-) > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote: > > > On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 11:42:41 +0330, takCoder wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > My question is: May it cause a problem, for rcorder or else, to have a > > > sub-folder in rc.d/ path ? > > > > First, the things you are refering to are directories and > > subdirectories. "Folder" is technically wrong. The correct > > term is directory. A "folder" is the name of a visual > > representation (usually an icon) that represents a directory > > within a GUI concept. The relations that reflect that > > difference are "is a" vs. "represents a". :-) > > > > Excuse me for that miss-use of "folder" term, and thanks for your > clarification. I'll try to keep that in mind ;) Certain environments encourage non-standard "creations" instead established terminology. It's important to differentiate here. I have to admit that I'm very pedantic with the paperwork. :-) > > It's about _files_, so * will usually be resolved by the > > shell to any entry found in the specified directory. In > > case that a subdirectory is found, any future operation > > will be done on _that subdirectory_ instead of a file > > (that is maybe contained in that subdirectory). That's > > why it's suggested to put the rc.d scripts without any > > "deeper nesting" into /etc/rc.d and /usr/local/etc/rc.d > > respectively. Similarly, non-OS scripts are processed > > from the /usr/local/etc/rc.d directory (and other directories > > the user might have added). > > > > Yes I guess that's the point! It is then where rc do not expect a directory > in rc.d and things happen.. If you have a look at /etc/rc.subr's functions find_local_scripts_old() and find_local_scripts_new() (where "old" and "new" corresponds to the syntax of the rc.d files), you can see that it works in a similar manner: the shell resolves <directoryname>/* and expects * to be resolved to files in order to call them. If a _directory_ is found, doing things that are supposed to be done with files (e. g. grep, test for +x and call it in a subshell) just doesn't work. The idea of supplying an additional directory where rc can search for rc.d-style files is the most convenient way to deal with this. > > > But now I can't be sure about it as i can't remember it clearly or find > > > it.. One of my mates created a sub-folder in his system's rc.d folder, so > > > he can run his preferred scripts there in his required order, using > > > /etc/rc. > > > > It would also be possible to add a custom /opt/rc.d > > directory and add this to the local_startup vairable > > in /etc/rc.conf, for example: > > > > local_startup="/usr/local/etc/rc.d /opt/rc.d" > > > > This will cause additional directories to be sourced. > > Note that I'm an optimist and therefore often (ab)use > > the Solaris-ism (Solarism?) of /opt. :-) > > > > Just keep being an optimist! That's what's right .. :) My intention of /opt is that I use it to keep things that are not managed by the system in any way, e. g. system-wide user scripts, manually installed programs or local ports. In this specific case, /opt contains a subtree structure similar to what the system uses (e. g. /opt/bin which is also in $PATH, /opt/libexec for handmade printer filters or /opt/src for local sources). I don't say that this is the _correct_ way to handle things, but it works so long that "never touch a running system" might be indicated. :-) The difference, by the way, of not using /usr/local for such things is that this subtree is reserved for software installed from ports or packages (read: system means), and many other directories are reserved for the OS itself, so putting random stuff in there simply doesn't sound right. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131101061631.2a9adb81.freebsd>