Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 11:58:37 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Michael Ross <gmx@ross.cx> Cc: Daniel Robbins <drobbins@funtoo.org>, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Replacing rc(8) (Was: FreeBSD Boot Times) Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206210913240.1607@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <op.wf725x1gg7njmm@michael-think> References: <4FDF6177.5050608@unsane.co.uk> <4FE0C123.8030301@gentoo.org> <CAGH67wRidMZrzjzTSdwud%2BZ5V--wOTN8CHXOWcOr%2BE5XHYo2rA@mail.gmail.com> <4FE0F773.1080403@gentoo.org> <CAGH67wQdb-c0Kf=60rkaJSH8Hd0OjwCi=rQQMzGq8xfp2q7b=Q@mail.gmail.com> <4FE100F9.2050009@funtoo.org> <20120620073920.GA5300@lonesome.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201618560.75278@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CAPDOV49kkOdeV%2B6LVW5j5PO6VYrrNVqWZEksc_GzvWHjbufoAQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201722520.1856@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CAPDOV4_ufNGyheDAhPxfndJ7WtH_u=5z7mrLtW-5-a9BMbCswg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206201745040.1949@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CAPDOV4_Fsj_QCLDWSs3o5qiDKS2hTH4qBf8fwJftne8KJNXy1Q@mail.gmail.com> <op.wf7v5el5g7njmm@michael-think> <CAPDOV4_x2T7p_3puD6AKpjoTwFCRPeP6mvvLxRVv_ZrgCTmU3g@mail.gmail.com> <CAPDOV4-2Hz=9fXBJ=oeRFxF7MEeQex946NdpgiPdSJzBwMrcBQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOjFWZ63C5mBQBYRnG4GKRBR1uPiyG06Svz_x44_=VnfwL=u7w@mail.gmail.com> <op.wf725x1gg7njmm@michael-think>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> All that's missing is a way to tell the RC system to use a different >> rc.conf file (like rc.conf.mobile, or rc.conf.wireless or >> rc.conf.whatever), and to run through the RC setup based on that file. > > ... and to be able to switch between two configurations at runtime, > without taking down services listed active in both configurations preferably. i already proposed how to make this easily with single rc.conf only. >> Our current RC system does everything needed except: >> - parallel execution of items that don't depend on each other true. can be actually added easily. >> - monitor running services and restart them if they crash should not be done, or at least not default. >> Compared to all the init/RC systems on Linux, ours has *many* >> advantages, not the least of which are: >> - very simple text configuration file it's a requirement not just adventage :) > Yes. > I don't even think it *needs* improving, but "service profiles" including > "network profiles" would be really nice and worth looking into. If we can get > that without loosing the simple text-file-based configuration, the better. we can. but from what i've seen about openrc it is overly complicated. For sure better that other things used in linux distros but still not tolerable. why replace something very good?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206210913240.1607>