Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 02:32:34 +0200 From: Jose M Rodriguez <josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Including PREFIX/etc/rc.d/* scripts in the system's rcorder for startup in 6.0-Release Message-ID: <200506100232.34832.josemi@redesjm.local> In-Reply-To: <42A8B4E6.9090401@FreeBSD.org> References: <42A8B4E6.9090401@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
El Jueves, 9 de Junio de 2005 23:30, escribi=F3: > Howdy, > > I realize that this is pretty short notice before the release, but > the rc.d team just got a spiffy new volunteer to do the legwork on > this, and so we're going to try to beat the code freeze/slushie > deadline for 6.0. What we've been discussing for the last few days on > the freebsd-rc list is a two-fold approach in order to avoid needing > a flag day to cover this issue. > > The first part of the approach is to hack /etc/rc.d/localpkg to use > rcorder to handle the keywords that are already in the scripts with > *.sh filename patterns. This will preserve the lexical ordering that > exists now, while giving port authors (and users of course) the > ability to start using keywords with existing scripts that fit the > *.sh pattern. > > Part two of this proposal is to hack on /etc/rc to use rcorder on any > scripts in PREFIX/etc/rc.d that DON'T use the *.sh filename pattern, > but DO include a new keyword (that will be specified). In this way, > port authors and users can start opting into the new system at their > convenience. Once the new system has been in place "long enough," we > can drop processing for the special key word, and just handle all > rc.d scripts the same, regardless of their location. > > This may sound more complicated than it needs to be, but the > discussion on the freebsd-rc list brought up a lot of interesting > cases that need to be considered as part of this transition, and I > believe we've simplified it as much as possible. My question at this > point is, does this approach sound reasonable? Our intention is to > coordinate this closely with y'all so that we don't do something that > will break the new release, or more importantly break backwards > computability. > I'm not sure that this is the correct approach. And even maybe too late=20 in the RELENG_6 timeline. =46irts, most ports in real need of rcorder can't wait to localpkg, and=20 use direct rc support breaking $prefix. Second, I can easy work scenarios where I can break any logic trying to=20 mix localpkg lex order and rcorder key order. If we go to maintain short release cycles, please, delay this to HEAD=20 after RELENG_6. And only merge it if we go to a safe status before=20 real release. I still remember latest approach to solve this. I think that the only safe way to take this is make some sort of 'stage'=20 concept into rc (use the SystemV runlevels as a very loose reference). We can use 'stage keys' for implement this. If we have safe localfs access at the end of stage 'n-1', we can do and=20 rcorder for stage 'n' mixing scripts with key 'stage n'=20 in /etc/rc.d/*, /usr/local/etc/rc.d/*, /usr/X11R6/etc/rc.d/* ... =2D- josemi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200506100232.34832.josemi>