Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 21 Jun 2012 07:40:06 +1000
From:      Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com>
To:        Daniel Robbins <drobbins@funtoo.org>
Cc:        Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>, "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Vincent Hoffman <vince@unsane.co.uk>, Richard Yao <ryao@funtoo.org>, Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>, Outback Dingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com>, Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>, openrc@gentoo.org, Atte =?iso-8859-1?Q?Peltom=E4ki?= <atte.peltomaki@iki.fi>
Subject:   Re: Replacing rc(8) (Was: FreeBSD Boot Times)
Message-ID:  <20120620214006.GA1651@aspire.rulingia.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPDOV49kkOdeV%2B6LVW5j5PO6VYrrNVqWZEksc_GzvWHjbufoAQ@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <4FDFB44D.9090308@gentoo.org> <4FE0ADCD.9010109@FreeBSD.org> <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>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--6TrnltStXW4iwmi0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2012-Jun-20 09:05:05 -0600, Daniel Robbins <drobbins@funtoo.org> wrote:
>I see a great potential for collaboration here between Gentoo, Funtoo
>(my current project, a derivative/fork of Gentoo), FreeBSD and OpenRC
>(which is now an independently-managed project, distinct from the
>upstream distros)

The more different projects can share common code, the better.

>But if boot time isn't a huge priority, then maybe it is the wrong
>place to focus.

Boot time is an issue for some people - even people with "never
rebooted" servers need fast boot times when they _do_ need to reboot
(hardware failures, kernel security fixes) to get that last '9' of
uptime.

> I think the big benefit of OpenRC to FreeBSD is that
>we are looking to continually improve it and include you in the
>requirements-gathering process for future development efforts.

Even if FreeBSD doesn't switch to OpenRC, it's definitely worth
looking at the shortcomings of the current rc system and how it could
be improved.  The most obvious ones (IMHO) are:
- Lack of dependency handling for manual start/stop
- No provision to automatically restart a daemon if it dies.

>Solaris SMF has already been mentioned.

As someone who has had the misfortune to use it, I would say that the
underlying concept is nice but the implementation is a disaster.  In
particular, _everything_ is different to "traditional" Unix init
systems.  The systems administrator needs to learn a completely new
mindset for interacting with the init system and the package developer
has to develop completely different service management scripts.

On 2012-Jun-20 17:28:45 +0200, Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia=
=2Epl> wrote:
>1) can it be compatible with 20000 ports already made for FreeBSD, where=
=20
>many of them install rc.d scripts in CURRENT format.

The dependency information should already be encoded in both base and
ports rc scripts.  Unfortunately, it looks like OpenRC encodes the
information in a different way, so it's not just a plugin replacement.
One task for anyone wanting to integrate OpenRC would be working out
how to handle this - preferably without rewriting every rc script.

Since we already have dependency information, there is no technical
reason why a tool like rcorder(8) couldn't indicate that particular
scripts or groups of scripts could run in parallel.  In practice, I
expect that doing so will turn up a large number of scripts which have
incorrect dependency information which has been masked by the current
serial processing.  Anyone implementing parallel rc processing will
need to be able to distinguish between errors in their tools and
errors in the actual rc scripts.  I know dougb@ regularly picks up
issues with new & updated ports but it's not realistic to rely on him
manually picking up every rc script error.

--=20
Peter Jeremy

--6TrnltStXW4iwmi0
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAk/iQzYACgkQ/opHv/APuIcvXACfdI9oHpHFdU4CB0KvK9mtB3xX
7WkAn089XtD4Cs9vxILx/BB5g1gywe4r
=JQ1V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--6TrnltStXW4iwmi0--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120620214006.GA1651>