From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Sep 27 12:03:39 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id MAA10301
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 12:03:39 -0700
Received: from healer.com (healer-gw.Empire.Net [205.164.80.204])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA10296
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 12:03:33 -0700
Received: (from gryphon@localhost) by healer.com (8.6.11/8.6.9.1) id PAA21561; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 15:06:40 -0400
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 15:06:40 -0400
From: Coranth Gryphon <gryphon@healer.com>
Message-Id: <199509271906.PAA21561@healer.com>
To: gryphon@healer.com, patl@asimov.volant.org, terry@lambert.org
Subject: Re: ports startup scripts
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, jmb@kryten.atinc.com, peter@taronga.com
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

>From patl@asimov.volant.org Wed Sep 27 13:12:14 1995
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 07:54:45 -0700
To: gryphon@healer.com, terry@lambert.org
Subject: Re: ports startup scripts
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, jmb@kryten.atinc.com, peter@taronga.com
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII


From: patl@asimov.volant.org
> I think I missed some of the details of the Makefile proposal.  How
> does a package install it's make dependancies?  Does it add lines to
> the makefile, or is the makefile dynamically generated by concatenating
> a bunch of small per-service make fragments?

The makefile is generated by "makerc" (conceptually similar to "makewhatis").

> If it adds lines to the makefile, it still suffers from the auto-edit
> safty concerns that the straight control file scheme does.  (Although
> it does eliminate the concerns about getting the order right.)

No files are edited by packages. The packages/ports put control information
into /etc/packages and /etc/init.d (for dependencies and scripts respectively).

The sysadmin then runs "makerc" to regenerate the startup Makefile.

If it includes a bunch of small fragments, that seems like an unnecessary
extra complication.

> And I think that either the file-name-ordering or straight-control-file
> scheme would make it easier to quickly review which services are started
> in what order than any make-based scheme.  (But I'm willing to be convinced
> otherwise.)

Actually, the Makefile scheme lists dependencies on the single line
that applies to each run-level. Thus (rough example) something like:


	level-3: mount-local start-nfs mount-nfs clean-locks clean-tmp ...
		
	mount-local:
		mount -t nonfs -a

	start-nfs: mountd nfsiod nfsd pcnfsd

	...

and so forth. ( The names have been changed to protect the unwritten :-)

-coranth


------------------------------------------+------------------------+
Coranth Gryphon <gryphon@healer.com>      |  "Faith Manages."      |
                                          |        - Satai Delenn  |
Phone: 603-598-3440   Fax: 603-598-3430   +------------------------+
USMail: 3 Hansom Drive, Merrimack, NH  03054
Disclaimer: All these words are yours, except Europa...