On Jul 5, 2013, at 11:05 PM, "Teske, Devin" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jul 5, 2013, at 10:09 PM, Garrett Cooper wrote: > >> On Jul 5, 2013, at 9:13 PM, Devin Teske wrote: >> >>> Author: dteske >>> Date: Sat Jul 6 04:13:47 2013 >>> New Revision: 252862 >>> URL: >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/252862&k=%2FbkpAUdJWZuiTILCq%2FFnQg%3D%3D%0A&r=Mrjs6vR4%2Faj2Ns9%2FssHJjg%3D%3D%0A&m=6Emrz4%2BdiEiu3QIuKxkRkKl%2BdgggvTvDq79TFhoaAC8%3D%0A&s=f8e3ea5c36067381ada1de66dd547b09eb051cd0761b399929dfa68851d0ca37 >>> 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 for >>> 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 better >>> MFC after: >>> 3 days >> >> Uh, why did you remove the conditional..? Why not just change the default >> from WITHOUT_BSDCONFIG to WITH_BSDCONFIG? >> >> 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… > > One plans was to use the libraries I'm bringing in to solve this PR: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/163508 > "[rc.subr] [patch] Add "enable" and "disable" commands to rc.subr" > > 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 > leverages it to provide all the nifty things it can do). The shell library is > of interest if we want to implement the high-level concept from the PR: > > sevice {name} { enable | disable | . . . } > > Since sysrc.subr provides a simple "f_sysrc_set $var $value" syntax (I'll > leave the rest up to your imagination). > > Staying on-topic, bsdconfig (or rather, its libraries) could end up entwined > to the shell commands and you may end up using it without ever directly > executing "bsdconfig". I'd like to read more about this. We (isilon) have hacked around rc(5) because the performance of rc is serialized and poor. I would prefer to avoid adding more end-user bloat to rc because it will drive users and consumers to take more drastic measures to bypass the rc system. Thanks.. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-rc To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
