Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 2 Dec 1998 10:11:38 -0500 (EST)
From:      ADRIAN Filipi-Martin <adrian@ubergeeks.com>
To:        Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@nomad.dataplex.net>
Cc:        Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: System V init (was: Linux to be deployed in Mexican schools; Where was FreeBSD?)
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.981202100250.9233A-100000@lorax.ubergeeks.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9812010627520.20091-100000@nomad.dataplex.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Richard Wackerbarth wrote:

> [ in /etc/rc ]
> 
> ...
> 
> . /etc/rc.conf
> if [ X"auto_sequence_scripts_enable" = X"YES" ] ; then
>    /etc/rc.rebuild_script_sequence
> fi
> . /etc/rc.script_sequence
> 
> 
> - - - 
> [ in /etc/rc.rebuild_script_sequence ]
> [A variant of Eivind's code whech generates ...]
> 
> - - -
> [ in /etc/rc.script_sequence ]
> lines (in the desired order) such as 
> 
> . /etc/rc.d/network1
> 
> /usr/local/etc/rc.d/apache start
> 
> - - -
> 
> I see a few complaints about this scheme.
> 
> 1) It certainly is a lot of effort to handle
> the common case where the startup script is
> so short that it nomally included inline.
> 
> 2) This scheme would require that the /etc/rc.script_sequence file
> be writeable.
> 
> 3) We need a scheme that automatically defaults scripts
> which have no sequencing info to the end of the sequence
> 
> 4) We need to be able to postpone major portions of the
> sequence until external events occur. In particular, consider
> PCMCIA ethernet interface cards that "appear" some time after
> the card deamon is started. We need to delay network services
> until the card appears. Further, we may need to delay ntpdate
> until a default route has had time to be discovered.

	Somewhat interesting.  Since I'm getting tired of aguing my
stick-in-the mud views, I'll shut up for a while until I can put some code
where my mouth is.  

	I figured I'd write my own SVR-like rc setup that doesn't have
most of the features I, and others, find so annoying.  I hope to finish it
in the next day or so.  It can be considered as another way of getting
things done in a SVR-like manner. 

	As I see it alternative implementations are always a good thing. 
_If_ we are to go with a SVR compatible rc, then a bake-off would be a
good idea to get as many people to contribute their ideas on the issue.

cheers,

	Adrian
--
[ adrian@ubergeeks.com -- Ubergeeks Consulting -- http://www.ubergeeks.com/ ]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.981202100250.9233A-100000>