From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jan 31 01:28:46 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA03117 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Sun, 31 Jan 1999 01:28:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from spinner.netplex.com.au (spinner.netplex.com.au [202.12.86.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA03108 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 1999 01:28:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) Received: from spinner.netplex.com.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spinner.netplex.com.au (8.9.2/8.9.2/Netplex) with ESMTP id RAA02696; Sun, 31 Jan 1999 17:26:42 +0800 (WST) (envelope-from peter@spinner.netplex.com.au) Message-Id: <199901310926.RAA02696@spinner.netplex.com.au> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Wes Peters cc: witr@rwwa.com, dcs@newsguy.com, brandon@roguetrader.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: more modular rc/init/uninit system... In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 30 Jan 1999 23:48:05 MST." <000342b3e1d2fb49_mailit@obie.softweyr.com> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 17:26:42 +0800 From: Peter Wemm Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Wes Peters wrote: > Robert Withrow alleged: > > >Regarding using Make for startup: > > > >wes@softweyr.com said: > >:- Good? Bad? Indifferent? > > > >I'd say: more complicated than the job requires. We have a *simpler* > >tool for managing graphs: tsort(1). > > > >If you go back to the process I suggested, you need only tsort the > >dependencies and save it in /var/run. It is then available for use > >to stop selected components. > > OK, I took a few minutes to RTFM. Yes, I can see how tsort could be > brought to bear on this issue. Do you propose to put the dependencies > in the rc scripts, in some grepabble fashion? I suppose if you added > or changed something, you would need to re-run tsort before doing > another start or stop operation, right? > > This seems doable, and an improvement over what we have, and what > SYSV has. The advantage of make is that you could do a 'make -j12 boot' style thing to fire off job initialization in parallel and still maintain dependencies. Of course, this could be argued to be a disasvantage too. :-) Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm Netplex Consulting "No coffee, No workee!" :-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message