Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 14:19:17 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> To: Jason Hellenthal <jhell@DataIX.net> Cc: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC][Change-Request] Create usefulness in rc.subr etc/rc.conf.d/*.conf namespace. Message-ID: <D1670EA4-437A-4D79-A5FC-8EE4D05466BA@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20110508202636.GF3527@DataIX.net> References: <20110508191336.GC3527@DataIX.net> <C7EC90A2-936C-44E1-BC5E-E249399AF9AB@gmail.com> <20110508202636.GF3527@DataIX.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On May 8, 2011, at 1:26 PM, Jason Hellenthal wrote: > > Garrett, > > On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 01:13:12PM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> On May 8, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Jason Hellenthal wrote: >> >>> >>> List, - Please reply-to freebsd-rc@freebsd.org >>> >>> Recently I have been going over some changes in the configurations that >>> are possible with the rc subsystem and to my dismay I have found some >>> inconsistencies with in particular the way rc.conf.d directory is >>> processed and the arguments that are supplied to load_rc_config so I have >>> patched it up... >>> >>> Let me explain: As determined by rc.subr load_rc_config, config's from >>> rc.conf.d are loaded by the scripts $name as an argument to load_rc_config >>> and thus only the name being parsed is is available to be used in the >>> rc.conf.d directory. Why is this bad ? Its not! but it is inconvenient as >>> the user has no direct way to know that a variable used by nfsd is also >>> needed by mountd or the same for various other scripts in the rc.d >>> directory. At this time these config's are explained to be available for >>> the user to utilize by rc.conf(5) but yet without much knowledge of the >>> inner workings of the rc subsystem it would be quite the feat to do. >>> >>> >>> The attachment[1] keeps this functionality the same while introducing a >>> more convenient approach for the user to modularize their configuration >>> however they see fit within a couple constraints that work very well. >>> >>> >>> What does it do ?: As stated above, current functionality is undisturbed >>> while allowing the user to create config's by any name they so desire as >>> long as it has an extension of ".conf", also introducing the ability to >>> turn a configuration file off by using chmod(1). You can turn nfsc1.conf >>> off/on by simply chmod [-/+]x etc/rc.conf.d/nfs1.conf >>> >>> >>> Why ? Simple. How many times have you been bitten by disabling something >>> in the rc.conf file and left to discover what you just disabled was also >>> used by another daemon but that daemon is now not starting ? This is a way >>> to virtualize your configuration allowing you to add multiple _enable= >>> lines to different configurations for different roles. For instance >>> rpcbind is used by both samba and nfs*. With this you can add >>> rpcbind_enable to both a configuration for samba and nfs and when you >>> disable one service you know that you have not disabled a dependent for >>> another. >>> >>> >>> This is a small addition that fixes currently broken undesirable aspects >>> of the configuration system that deals with the rc.conf.d directory with a >>> SysV style init approach that is just as flexible. This should apply >>> cleanly to current and stable/8 & 8.2-RELEASE systems. Once more feedback >>> has been received Ill update the manual page with any suggestions >>> regenerate the patch to accommodate and file a PR. >>> >>> >>> 1). http://patches.jhell.googlecode.com/hg/rc.subr_modular_conf.patch >> >> Doing: >> >> find /etc/rc.conf.d/ -type f -name '*.conf' -mindepth 1 -maxdepth 1 -perm +111 | while read _modular_conf; do >> debug "Sourcing $_modular_conf" >> . "$_modular_conf" >> done >> >> might be better. There's some more magic that could ultimately be done to make this more secure/robust using "-print0" | xargs, but it's up to you how you might want to go about solving that problem. >> Also, I don't know if depending on a .conf file to be executable is necessarily the best course of action. > > Yeah I see what you are getting at there and I came across thinking the > same thing. Fortunately /etc/rc.conf.d/*.conf is only one level deep > without using find(1). Yes, but the above method used avoids simple E2BIG problems. It just doesn't properly deal with filenames that break on IFS, etc though (that's part of where I was leading, but I said "security" instead. > As for the security sense if someone has a way to write to that directory > then most likely they are not going to be looking into placing anything in > that directory as theyll have rights to change anything under the rc sun! > plus anyting under most of the rest of the system. Yes that's true. BTW, what about $local_startup? > I do like the approach though. Thank you. Thanks :). -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D1670EA4-437A-4D79-A5FC-8EE4D05466BA>