From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Nov 18 13:23:45 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA09179 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 13:23:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from detlev.UUCP (tex-107.camalott.com [208.229.74.107]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA09171 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 13:23:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from joelh@gnu.org) Received: (from joelh@localhost) by detlev.UUCP (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA01331; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 15:22:44 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from joelh) To: Adrian Filipi-Martin Cc: Gary Kline , Jamie Lawrence , Jacques Vidrine , Nik Clayton , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: /etc/rc.d, and changes to /etc/rc? References: From: Joel Ray Holveck Date: 18 Nov 1998 15:22:43 -0600 In-Reply-To: ADRIAN Filipi-Martin's message of "Wed, 18 Nov 1998 00:47:26 -0500 (EST)" Message-ID: <86emr0itlo.fsf@detlev.UUCP> Lines: 59 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.3 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I don't see where the above would ever be anything but a homegrown > script. If you want fancy do-it-all scripts, go for it. This is > exactly why I dislike start/stop scripts. Most of them lump several > realted but independent processes together. But often, multiple processes are needed to shut down a daemon. As this is a common task, then let's lump them together. If you need more granularity, we're not taking away the individual commands. If anything, we're exposing the necessary steps to users not yet familiar with a particular package. To put it another way: you've got touch, wall, and halt; do you still use shutdown? > Well, take a look at HP-UX's start/stop and init levels. It > actually works much better and is more orthogonal than Solaris. I find it > rather messy and I had to rewrite scripts because Solaris doesn't honor > the #! at the beginning of the scripts. Fix /etc/initscr (or whatever it is that runs the scripts; I've forgotten since then). Solaris honors #!, it's just got a broken init system that is likely easily fixed. >> The commonality is the major win, I think. Either the BSD >> world moves to the SysV model, or Sun and SCO and AIX and >> Linux should adopt our model. > By all means, let them come. You know as well as I do that most SVR4-worlders would find /etc/rc a step backwards. That just plain ain't gonna happen. > Most vendors that have start/stop scripts don't do a good job at > it. The ratsnest of sym/hard links is ridiculous and finding where a > start/stop script is run from is annoying. We're not talking about adopting the entire SysV init heirarchy, which is where most of the ratsnest comes from. We're talking about augmenting the existing rc system with a little bit more. > Now, consider the following. > Total lines in FreeBSD-2.2.6 /etc/rc.* > 1347 total > Total lines in IRIX 6.5's /etc/{b,}rc* and init.d scripts: > 4873 total > I think it would be fair to say the number of lines of rc-code > would be substantially larger under FreeBSD if converted to start/stop > scripts. The brevity and flexability is one of the current BSD rc files. Perhaps I should point out that the latter handles both startup and shutdown. The former handles startup only. Happy hacking, joelh -- Joel Ray Holveck - joelh@gnu.org Fourth law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message