From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Mon Jan 18 02:13:30 2021 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 538EB4DF30E for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 02:13:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dclarke@blastwave.org) Received: from mail.oetec.com (mail.oetec.com [108.160.241.186]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.oetec.com", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DJwLd1G95z4ndQ for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 02:13:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dclarke@blastwave.org) X-Spam-Status: No X-oetec-MailScanner-From: dclarke@blastwave.org X-oetec-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-3.351, required 6, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.00, BAYES_00 -1.90, DKIM_SIGNED 0.10, DKIM_VALID -0.10, DKIM_VALID_AU -0.10, DKIM_VALID_EF -0.10, NICE_REPLY_A -0.25, URIBL_BLOCKED 0.00) X-oetec-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-oetec-MailScanner-ID: 10I2ClSD009773 X-oetec-MailScanner-Information: Please contact oetec for more information Received: from [172.16.35.2] (cpeac202e7325b3-cmac202e7325b0.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.253.170.241]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.oetec.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-8) with ESMTPSA id 10I2ClSD009773 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 21:12:48 -0500 Subject: Re: service -e doesn't really sort does it? the cool tip is slightly off To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: From: Dennis Clarke Message-ID: <57364ba6-b680-c8cb-4303-63dbcdd8a187@blastwave.org> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 02:12:46 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4DJwLd1G95z4ndQ X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.98 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[blastwave.org:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[blastwave.org,quarantine]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.98)[-0.978]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[99.253.170.241:received]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[108.160.241.186:from]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_HAS_QUESTION(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:812, ipnet:108.160.240.0/20, country:CA]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[blastwave.org:s=default]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-current@freebsd.org]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[108.160.241.186:from:127.0.2.255]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-current] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 02:13:30 -0000 On 1/17/21 1:46 PM, Graham Perrin wrote: > On 16/01/2021 23:28, Dennis Clarke wrote: > >> … maybe take out the word "sorted". Either that or >> insert the "started order" as the manpage claims  : >> >> root@rhea:/usr/src/freebsd-src # diff -u >> usr.bin/fortune/datfiles/freebsd-tips.orig >> usr.bin/fortune/datfiles/freebsd-tips >> --- usr.bin/fortune/datfiles/freebsd-tips.orig  2021-01-15 >> 00:37:37.863506000 +0000 >> +++ usr.bin/fortune/datfiles/freebsd-tips       2021-01-16 >> 07:46:57.335803000 +0000 >> @@ -517,7 +517,7 @@ >> >>                  -- Lars Engels >>   % >> -If you want to get a sorted list of all services that are started when >> FreeBSD boots, >> +If you want to get a list of all services that are started when FreeBSD >> boots, >>   enter "service -e". >> >>                  -- Lars Engels >> root@rhea:/usr/src/freebsd-src # >> >> Sorry for being all OCD here. Perhaps it should say sorted in the order >> in which they were started. Something like that. >> > > In lieu of 'sorted', how about 'dependency-ordered'? > Anything that makes obvious sense would be nice. When I say "obvious" here I mean "really obvious to a new user that just installed FreeBSD yesterday" and not "obvious to a twenty year expert." Dennis