From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jan 31 11:14:35 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA07320 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Sun, 31 Jan 1999 11:14:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from peach.ocn.ne.jp (peach.ocn.ne.jp [210.145.254.87]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA07303 for ; Sun, 31 Jan 1999 11:14:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dcs@newsguy.com) Received: from newsguy.com by peach.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN) id EAA19304; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 04:14:23 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <36B4A6D5.1C73F700@newsguy.com> Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 03:54:13 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: pt-BR,ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dru Nelson CC: Robert Withrow , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: more modular rc/init/uninit system... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Dru Nelson wrote: > > Still, services like mail, httpd, dns are fairly independent. They > usually don't rely on too much. > > However, I think this is something to strive for. It would be nice to > get the warning: 'can't start httpd -> depends on database which isn't > running. Start database? [Y/n]?' I think it was Terry who came with the following example in one of the previous incarnations of this thread. Services like mail and dns depend on the network. Which network? The ppp dial on demand of your laptop, or the network DHCP when you dock it in your office? Obviously, both are valid. So, when you start dns, it must account for both possibilities. It depends on "at least one of them" being up. You also want to just tell it to start dns, and have all dependencies brought up automatically. You need a "default" network stack. If you stop the ppp, all things that were depending on it must be brought down first, *if* they don't have something else providing the dependency for them (like the network). The usual answer for this scenario is "this is too complicated; let's just do the levels stuff". Which, obviously, is another way of saying "It is too much work to design/implement what you want, so I'll settle for what *I* want, even though *you* are perfectly happy with the way things are right now, and would not have any use for lesser functionality than you described." Thankfully, people saying this have not also produced the code, which is much more likely to get things changed. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com Would you mind not shooting at the thermonuclear weapons? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message