Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2013 00:50:17 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com> To: Devin Teske <dteske@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Devin Teske <dteske@FreeBSD.org>, "freebsd-rc@freebsd.org" <freebsd-rc@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r252862 - head/usr.sbin Message-ID: <F854682B-C38F-49A2-ADF5-B2FB17347FBF@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FB2721@ltcfiswmsgmb21> References: <201307060413.r664DmT5009602@svn.freebsd.org> <43915FB0-442B-42CA-BA1A-E346D95838B5@gmail.com> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201FB2721@ltcfiswmsgmb21>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jul 5, 2013, at 11:05 PM, "Teske, Devin" <Devin.Teske@fisglobal.com> wrot= e: > On Jul 5, 2013, at 10:09 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: >=20 >> On Jul 5, 2013, at 9:13 PM, Devin Teske wrote: >>=20 >>> Author: dteske >>> Date: Sat Jul 6 04:13:47 2013 >>> New Revision: 252862 >>> URL: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=3Dhttp://svnweb.freebsd.= org/changeset/base/252862&k=3D%2FbkpAUdJWZuiTILCq%2FFnQg%3D%3D%0A&r=3DMrjs6v= R4%2Faj2Ns9%2FssHJjg%3D%3D%0A&m=3D6Emrz4%2BdiEiu3QIuKxkRkKl%2BdgggvTvDq79TFh= oaAC8%3D%0A&s=3Df8e3ea5c36067381ada1de66dd547b09eb051cd0761b399929dfa68851d0= ca37 >>> Log: >>> Take the training-wheels off, after nearly 30 months of development. MFC= to >>> stable/9 planned after MFC 3-day period. The MFC to stable/9 is desired f= or >>> the next release to get some much-needed time: >>> + Living side-by-side with sysinstall for compare/contrast/transition >>> + Living side-by-side with bsdinstall for integration/transition >>> + Additional feedback/testing before eventual 10.0-R to make it even bet= ter >>> MFC after: >>> 3 days >>=20 >> Uh, why did you remove the conditional..? Why not just change the default= from WITHOUT_BSDCONFIG to WITH_BSDCONFIG? >>=20 >> I don't need this necessarily on an already tuned system and this doesn't= seem like something that should always be included on an appliance=81c >=20 > One plans was to use the libraries I'm bringing in to solve this PR: >=20 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3Dconf/163508 > "[rc.subr] [patch] Add "enable" and "disable" commands to rc.subr" >=20 > The initial patch was rejected by dougb and I (as can be seen in the audit= trail) because editing rc.conf(5) is not a simple proposition. bsdconfig(8)= brings in a shell library called "sysrc.subr" (and the sysrc(8) utility lev= erages it to provide all the nifty things it can do). The shell library is o= f interest if we want to implement the high-level concept from the PR: >=20 > sevice {name} { enable | disable | . . . } >=20 > Since sysrc.subr provides a simple "f_sysrc_set $var $value" syntax (I'll l= eave the rest up to your imagination). >=20 > Staying on-topic, bsdconfig (or rather, its libraries) could end up entwin= ed to the shell commands and you may end up using it without ever directly e= xecuting "bsdconfig". I'd like to read more about this. We (isilon) have hacked around rc(5) becau= se the performance of rc is serialized and poor. I would prefer to avoid add= ing more end-user bloat to rc because it will drive users and consumers to t= ake more drastic measures to bypass the rc system. Thanks..=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F854682B-C38F-49A2-ADF5-B2FB17347FBF>