Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:29:18 +0100 From: Vincent Hoffman <vince@unsane.co.uk> To: Stefan Lambrev <stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>, Adrian Penisoara <ady@freebsd.ady.ro>, wbentley@futurecis.com Subject: Re: If not the force, what should I use? (Was: FreeBSD in Business (was Re: Idea for FreeBSD)) Message-ID: <48A1BA5E.2050000@unsane.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <48A1B641.6080407@moneybookers.com> References: <78cb3d3f0808120810o54f49373n69ac5076c9a9c9b7@mail.gmail.com> <20080812115132.44b2e8f7@mbook.local> <48A1B641.6080407@moneybookers.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Stefan Lambrev wrote: > > > Mike Meyer wrote: >> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:10:22 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara" >> <ady@freebsd.ady.ro> wrote: >> >>>>>>> While we're at it, I wish we could leverage the posibility for the >>>>>>> admin to manually start the service at the CLI, no matter >>>>>>> whether the >>>>>>> service has been enabled or not -- that is the "<svc>_enable" >>>>>>> keyword >>>>>>> should have effect only in the bootup/automatic contexts. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Like keywords - forcestart forcerestart forcestop ?!?! >>>>>> >>>>> Yes, I am always reminded of that :). >>>>> Well, to tell you the truth, I do not know of any other OS which >>>>> requires prefixing with "force" the start/stop actions in order to >>>>> act >>>>> on the service at the command line, and personally I wish it weren't >>>>> the case. >>>>> >>>> Well I bet you can find this in most linux distros that copy >>>> FreeBSD. What >>>> about gentoo? >>>> >>> Umm, I have used Gentoo and I do not remember having to use >>> "forcestart" at the command line... >>> >> >> Ok, given that you 1) want to have both "XXXX this service if it's >> part of our normal runtime" and "XXXX this service even if it's not >> part of our normal runtime" as script commands, and that 2) XXXX >> without a prefix gets the "if it's part of our normal runtime" >> meaning, as we want the user to have to explicitly say "Yes, I know >> this looks odd, but I know what I'm doing so do it anyway" to get the >> "even if it's not part of our normal runtime" behavior, then what >> would you have us use instead of "forceXXXX"? >> >> Personally, I think "start -f" or "start --force" might have been >> better, but it's to late to fix such a minor thing. >> > I think the idea (behind not using force) is to implement something > like in RH where there is a number of folders (for every run level) > populated with links to the real rc scripts which are in /etc/init.d/ > and when you type /etc/init.d/script start it will be started > but the boot up rc.scripts will never do start on /etc/init.d/ itself > only on the folder with links. > It's not much better (or worse?) then the current system in freebsd, > so I do not see why we should bother. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Init I hate sysV style init myself, half of why I moved to *BSD Vince
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48A1BA5E.2050000>