From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 8 23:10:26 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1AB516A419 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 23:10:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC00D43D49 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 23:10:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k58NAQuJ075887 for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 23:10:26 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k58NAQBk075886; Thu, 8 Jun 2006 23:10:26 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 23:10:26 GMT Message-Id: <200606082310.k58NAQBk075886@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org From: Rostislav Krasny Cc: Subject: Re: conf/94377 : [patch] /etc/rc.d/sshd improperly tests random dev state X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Rostislav Krasny List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 23:10:27 -0000 The following reply was made to PR conf/94377; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Rostislav Krasny To: Doug White Cc: Florent Thoumie , bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: conf/94377 : [patch] /etc/rc.d/sshd improperly tests random dev state Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 00:13:30 +0300 On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 13:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Doug White wrote: > *shrug* The patch sat idle for 4 months, so you had your chance to say > your piece. I don't think doing another merge cycle just to sate a minor > stylistic nit is justified. This code runs once any time the rc script is > executed, which on most systems is once on boot. Its not like we're trying > to shave cycles here. I'm not a FreeBSD developer and I don't check every patch in GNATS or every commit in HEAD. I've seen that particular patch, for the first time, only when it has been MFCed to RELENG_6. Your version is working and I'm not pushing you to change it. But I think [ "${seeded}" = "0" ] is not only more efficient but also more readable than [ "x${seeded}" != "x" ] && [ ${seeded} -eq 0 ] That is why I wrote my first email. Do with it whatever you think is right to do.