Re: RCng Awkwardness
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:50:45AM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote: > I find the standard arguments used by RCng quite > awkward. In particular, especially for people who > have worked with SysV-style init scripts, it's We aren't trying to be compatable with SysV. We are compatable with other BSD's with an RCng deployment. > I would find it vastly more intuitive if the > current arguments were named differently: > > current 'start' -> new 'boot' > current 'stop' -> new 'shutdown' > current 'forcestart' -> new 'start' > current 'forcestop' -> new 'stop' No thank you. This would be a gratitious change from the existing BSD prior art. > This better reflects the actual usage: > the current 'start' and 'stop' are really > intended to be used by RC at system boot > and shutdown time. No, they are also used by sysadmins wanting to cycle a service. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: RCng Awkwardness
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:23:48PM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote: > Gordon Tetlow wrote: > > >On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:50:45AM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote: > > > >>I find the standard arguments used by RCng quite > >>awkward. In particular, ... "/etc/rc.d/nfsd stop" does > >>not actually stop the nfsd process. ... > > > >... I've found this behavior to be quite annoying. I'll > >see if I can put something together. If you want to help me out and > >put together the patches, I'd be more than happy to commit them. > > > I have something partly sketched out, but > it still needs some work. I can > send you something in the next > couple of days to look at. > > I see two awkward issues: > > * Is it necessary to distinguish 'stop' > (unconditional stop) from 'shutdown' > (stop only if enabled)?? > > Seems that at system shutdown you want > everything to be taken down, regardless > of whether it was brought up at boot > or brought up manually post-boot. > The unconditional 'stop' seems to be > all that's needed. I agree, but can you make it use shutdown and just alias it to stop? This will be just in case we see a new need for a special shutdown case. > * Local rc scripts (in /usr/local/etc/rc.d) > will still get run with a 'start' > argument, while system scripts in > /etc/rc.d will get a 'boot' argument. > That's a bit awkward, but still > reasonably consistent: 'start' > is still an unconditional operation. That's fine. No big deal there. -gordon msg45718/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RCng Awkwardness
Gordon Tetlow wrote: On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:50:45AM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote: I find the standard arguments used by RCng quite awkward. In particular, ... "/etc/rc.d/nfsd stop" does not actually stop the nfsd process. ... ... I've found this behavior to be quite annoying. I'll see if I can put something together. If you want to help me out and put together the patches, I'd be more than happy to commit them. I have something partly sketched out, but it still needs some work. I can send you something in the next couple of days to look at. I see two awkward issues: * Is it necessary to distinguish 'stop' (unconditional stop) from 'shutdown' (stop only if enabled)?? Seems that at system shutdown you want everything to be taken down, regardless of whether it was brought up at boot or brought up manually post-boot. The unconditional 'stop' seems to be all that's needed. * Local rc scripts (in /usr/local/etc/rc.d) will still get run with a 'start' argument, while system scripts in /etc/rc.d will get a 'boot' argument. That's a bit awkward, but still reasonably consistent: 'start' is still an unconditional operation. I don't see any way around this without breaking existing systems after upgrade. Tim Kientzle To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: RCng Awkwardness
Gordon Tetlow writes:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:50:45AM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote:
> > I find the standard arguments used by RCng quite
> > awkward. In particular, especially for people who
> > have worked with SysV-style init scripts, it's
> > rather surprising that "/etc/rc.d/nfsd stop" does
> > not actually stop the nfsd process. Likewise, 'start'
> > doesn't actually start the specified system.
>
> As one of the people that supposedly worked on this. I'm heartily in
> favor of this. I've found this behavior to be quite annoying. I'll
> see if I can put something together. If you want to help me out and
> put together the patches, I'd be more than happy to commit them.
>
> -gordon
Even more annoyingly, the RCng nfsd script ignores arguments specified
in /etc/rc.conf. See the example below, where "nfsd" is my patched
script, "nfsd.old" is what is in CVS now. Patch appended.
% grep nfs /etc/rc.conf
nfs_server_enable="YES"
nfs_server_flags="-u -t -n 8 -h 172.31.193.10 -h 172.31.193.1"
% ./nfsd.old stop
nfsd not running?
% sudo ./nfsd.old start
Starting nfsd.
% ps ax | grep nfsd | wc -l
5
%sudo ./nfsd.old stop
Stopping nfsd.
kill: 2903: No such process
kill: 2905: No such process
<4:33pm>whisper/gallatin:rc.d>ps ax | grep nfsd | wc -l
0
% sudo ./nfsd start
Starting nfsd.
% ps ax | grep nfsd | wc -l
9
%
Note that the default script ignores the arguments -n 8 and starts
only 4 nfsds.
Can this be fixed, please?
Thanks,
Drew
cvs diff nfsd
Index: nfsd
===
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/etc/rc.d/nfsd,v
retrieving revision 1.8
diff -u -r1.8 nfsd
--- nfsd12 Oct 2002 10:31:31 - 1.8
+++ nfsd24 Oct 2002 23:57:27 -
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
name="nfsd"
rcvar=`set_rcvar nfs_server`
command="/usr/sbin/${name}"
+load_rc_config $name
case ${OSTYPE} in
FreeBSD)
@@ -51,5 +52,4 @@
return 0
}
-load_rc_config $name
run_rc_command "$1"
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: RCng Awkwardness
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:50:45AM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote: > I find the standard arguments used by RCng quite > awkward. In particular, especially for people who > have worked with SysV-style init scripts, it's > rather surprising that "/etc/rc.d/nfsd stop" does > not actually stop the nfsd process. Likewise, 'start' > doesn't actually start the specified system. As one of the people that supposedly worked on this. I'm heartily in favor of this. I've found this behavior to be quite annoying. I'll see if I can put something together. If you want to help me out and put together the patches, I'd be more than happy to commit them. -gordon msg45677/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
RCng Awkwardness
I find the standard arguments used by RCng quite awkward. In particular, especially for people who have worked with SysV-style init scripts, it's rather surprising that "/etc/rc.d/nfsd stop" does not actually stop the nfsd process. Likewise, 'start' doesn't actually start the specified system. I would find it vastly more intuitive if the current arguments were named differently: current 'start' -> new 'boot' current 'stop' -> new 'shutdown' current 'forcestart' -> new 'start' current 'forcestop' -> new 'stop' This better reflects the actual usage: the current 'start' and 'stop' are really intended to be used by RC at system boot and shutdown time. 'forcestart' and 'forcestop' are really for manually starting/stopping services. For that matter, I don't really understand why 'stop' and 'forcestop' are separate anyway; if I type 'stop', I want it to stop, even if rc.conf says it shouldn't be running. I could provide diffs to change this, but won't bother if everyone else thinks the existing system is perfect and unalterable. ;-) Tim Kientzle To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
