Date: Sun, 24 Sep 1995 07:57:10 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb@kryten.Atinc.COM> To: Peter da Silva <peter@taronga.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports startup scripts Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9509240745.B27857-0100000@kryten.atinc.com> In-Reply-To: <199509240313.WAA01237@bonkers.taronga.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 23 Sep 1995, Peter da Silva wrote: > In article <Pine.3.89.9509232038.B7901-0100000@kryten.atinc.com>, > Jonathan M. Bresler <jmb@kryten.Atinc.COM> wrote: > > each rc?.d is a separate directory, with possibly distinct files. > > If you don't have the files with the same "service" name linked to each other, > you have a messed up installation. That's no worse than having bootleg stuff > in /etc/rc instead of /etc/rc.local. with hard links, i cant tell if they are the same or not until after running 'ls' on them. (you know this ;) ) why not a system that shows they are the same? > > with the K* and S* files in different directories, one for each > >run level, ascertaining the differences is needlessly harder. > > There are no differences unless you're using a broken editor. i dont understand this. what editor are you suggesting? > Add a check for that to /etc/daily. a check for what? for identical files? why?? i may want to start cron in exactly the same fashion in more than one run-state--say multi-user and full-network. > > consider instead a file that lists which scripts to run for each > >'run level or the term of the day we are using' and the order of > >execution. now if both level A and level B need script Sfoo, there is > >only one Sfoo. no symlinks required. no hard links required. it is > >immediately obvious what is differnct and what is the same among the run > >levels. > > And you have to trust 150 packages to edit this file without clobbering it. copy the file to /tmp. edit the version in tmp. display the diff. either prompt for accepting the change (all ports that add services become interactive) or report the new file's location and ask the user to verify and install. regardless of method, the user has to startup the new service or reboot or run ldconfig or .... > And you have to trust 100,000 system administrators to do the same. Getting > them to "mv KXXfoo .KXXfoo" is easier. how about mv /tmp/all_daemons_file /<canonical location>/all_daemons_file > We have ... novice ... system admins at work. The number of botched systems > went way down when we copied the run-level stuff from System V to our Xenix > boxes. DEC thought the same thing... that's one of the things they picked > up from System V for Digital UNIX... and they have been gratifyingly > conservative about that. > > I'm not that averse to having a unified directory, but each component should > have its own startup and config file. okay, sounds good. one file, one service. one master file that coordinates them all. > Like I said in my original response, just having /etc/rc.d with S and K > scripts run by /etc/rc and shutdown would be a massive improvement. isnt this the one file that each port has to modify. an objection you raised above? > Run levels are *also* useful. > > Something like /etc/default to hold all the random *.conf files (/etc/conf.d?) > would tidy up /etc no end too... yes. without doubt. jmb Jonathan M. Bresler jmb@kryten.atinc.com | Analysis & Technology, Inc. FreeBSD Postmaster jmb@FreeBSD.Org | 2341 Jeff Davis Hwy play go. | Arlington, VA 22202 ride bike. hack FreeBSD.--ah the good life | 703-418-2800 x346
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.3.89.9509240745.B27857-0100000>