Re: rc.d startup scripts
While this is probably not the place to post this, I will also note that the use of 'snprintf' was denigrated because it was NOT part of the original 'printf' package. You learn from your mistakes, you do NOT enshrine them and worship them as the Truth of Ancestral Wisdom. I will simply state that I consider the SystemV startup facilities superior to the BSD ones, IN CONCEPT. The various implementations of them have flaws and problems, but they provide more, better, easier, more modular, and simple management facilities. There. And before you start poking at me, I work with them all on a DEVELOPER and ADMINISTRATOR level basis, i.e. - in the trenches and digging, on a daily basis. Patrick Powell Patrick Powell Astart Technologies, [EMAIL PROTECTED]9475 Chesapeake Drive, Suite D, Network and System San Diego, CA 92123 Consulting 858-874-6543 FAX 858-279-8424 LPRng - Print Spooler (http://www.astart.com) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Kris Kennaway wrote: On Sun, 7 May 2000, Doug Barton wrote: I'm going to reply to the system part of this too, replies to this thread should split off to -current. I have a design in mind for a new rc system that uses scripts with "start, stop, status" operators to both upgrade and downgrade services, where "services" are defined as groups of daemons/programs that work together. For example, "nfs" would be an example of a service, which would be subdivided into client and server, etc. Eivind Eklund made a prototype some time back which addressed this issue - you'd do well to take a look at that one first before reinventing the wheel :) Point well taken. If anyone has references to this work, or an easy introduction to netbsd's version I'd love to look at them. I've been hoping to carve out some time to work on this, but every time I talk about vacation, my boss just laughs Doug -- "Live free or die" - State motto of my ancestral homeland, New Hampshire Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote: Just curious, but wouldn't this be FreeSVR4??? :-) I'm going to assume that the smiley means you're joking, but I hope that we can stick to discussing this plan on its merits, rather than rejecting it out of hand because it's like something that someone else is doing. Doug -- "Live free or die" - State motto of my ancestral homeland, New Hampshire Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
On Mon, 08 May 2000 23:53:16 MST, Doug Barton wrote: Eivind Eklund made a prototype some time back which addressed this issue - you'd do well to take a look at that one first before reinventing the wheel :) Point well taken. If anyone has references to this work, or an easy introduction to netbsd's version I'd love to look at them. http://people.FreeBSD.org/~eivind/newrc.html Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Errrmmm Really, did you check the archives for the issue? There used to be a real long thread on why/why not sysV style init scripts. It produced not one but several flamewars iirc 8-) In short - if we change from the present scheme, we want something better than just stop and restart entry points for the scripts. What happens if the restarting is not an atomic, independent act? On Sat, 6 May 2000, Will Andrews wrote: Hello, I've noticed an inconsistency among our ports. It seems that not every port that installs rc.d startup scripts includes methods to not only startup, but also shutdown and/or restart, where appropriate. (Sent to -ports for ports hackers' opinions.) Shouldn't this sort of thing be standardized? And maybe a similar method be integrated into /etc/rc for restarting base system daemons? (Sent to -current for src hackers' opinions.) Please continue specific discussion on either of these in their own list, or if reply is general Cc both. -- Will Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] GCS/E/S @d- s+:++:- a---+++ C++ UB P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w--- ?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++ DI+++ D+ G+ e- h! r--+++ y? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Point well taken. If anyone has references to this work, or an easy introduction to netbsd's version I'd love to look at them. There's useful stuff in the rc(8) and rcorder(8) manual pages, but I can't find any more convenient copies of them other than by extracting NetBSD tar files. The scripts themselves look fairly easy to understand from just browsing around http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] 421 manifold mosaic of the mundane To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:53:16PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: Point well taken. If anyone has references to this work, or an easy introduction to netbsd's version I'd love to look at them. I've been hoping to carve out some time to work on this, but every time I talk about vacation, my boss just laughs That's to be expected of a company like Yahoo! -- Will Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] GCS/E/S @d- s+:++:- a---+++ C++ UB P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w--- ?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++ DI+++ D+ G+ e- h! r--+++ y? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Just curious, but wouldn't this be FreeSVR4??? :-) I'm going to assume that the smiley means you're joking, but I hope that we can stick to discussing this plan on its merits, rather than rejecting it out of hand because it's like something that someone else is doing. Yeah, I was just joking, I kinda like some things about SVR4, but I still think it would be nice to keep the option of using some of the regular rc scripts that we have now. Imagine the confusion of the people that have ONLY used FreeBSD when they go in and see rc.d and all it's scripts. Personally I kinda like the rc.d stuff better myself, but I'm just thinking about the average user. Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Will Andrews wrote: On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:53:16PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: Point well taken. If anyone has references to this work, or an easy introduction to netbsd's version I'd love to look at them. I've been hoping to carve out some time to work on this, but every time I talk about vacation, my boss just laughs That's to be expected of a company like Yahoo! Hey... easy there. :) They're actually pretty good about time off, but for better or worse I'm a central part of the current development cycle for the new products we're just about to release. I had some time off scheduled a while back, but I've had to slip it a couple times. I guess I should take it as a compliment that they won't let me leave... *chuckle* Doug -- "Live free or die" - State motto of my ancestral homeland, New Hampshire Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote: Yeah, I was just joking, I kinda like some things about SVR4, but I still think it would be nice to keep the option of using some of the regular rc scripts that we have now. Imagine the confusion of the people that have ONLY used FreeBSD when they go in and see rc.d and all it's scripts. Personally I kinda like the rc.d stuff better myself, but I'm just thinking about the average user. What does the average user do with the rc scripts? (BTW, I'm not being combative here, just using your letter as an opportunity...) In my outline we would still have /etc/rc.conf[.local], which is what the average user interacts with now. It's what happens behind the scenes that I want to change. The way that the various services get started. Instead of the arcane, confusing system of rc* files we have now (most of which grew out of necessity, don't get me wrong) we would have a system that could be used at startup, and then also used while the system is running to upgrade and downgrade individual bits, or groups of bits. Doug -- "Live free or die" - State motto of my ancestral homeland, New Hampshire Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
On Tue, May 09, 2000 at 12:12:44PM -0400, Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote: Yeah, I was just joking, I kinda like some things about SVR4, but I still think it would be nice to keep the option of using some of the regular rc scripts that we have now. What I am prosing aguments what we have today (in ports) and simply adds argment targets. No arguments to the RC script would give you the same behavior you see today. -- -- David([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Yeah, I was just joking, I kinda like some things about SVR4, but I still think it would be nice to keep the option of using some of the regular rc scripts that we have now. Imagine the confusion of the people that have ONLY used FreeBSD when they go in and see rc.d and all it's scripts. Personally I kinda like the rc.d stuff better myself, but I'm just thinking about the average user. What does the average user do with the rc scripts? (BTW, I'm not being combative here, just using your letter as an opportunity...) In my outline we would still have /etc/rc.conf[.local], which is what the average user interacts with now. It's what happens behind the scenes that I want to change. The way that the various services get started. Instead of the arcane, confusing system of rc* files we have now (most of which grew out of necessity, don't get me wrong) we would have a system that could be used at startup, and then also used while the system is running to upgrade and downgrade individual bits, or groups of bits. Well, I guess I am not an average user then. I have customized most of my rc scripts. You are right though, it seems much better to "change what goes on behind the scenes" because it took me quite a while to learn what everything we have now did, and it took me only a day or two to figure out how to use the system you describe (well the back end anyway) Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Narvi wrote: Errrmmm Really, did you check the archives for the issue? There used to be a real long thread on why/why not sysV style init scripts. It produced not one but several flamewars iirc 8-) In short - if we change from the present scheme, we want something better than just stop and restart entry points for the scripts. What happens if the restarting is not an atomic, independent act? I already covered this. Please read all your mail on a thread before responding, thanks. Doug -- "Live free or die" - State motto of my ancestral homeland, New Hampshire Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
On Sun, 7 May 2000, Doug Barton wrote: I'm going to reply to the system part of this too, replies to this thread should split off to -current. I have a design in mind for a new rc system that uses scripts with "start, stop, status" operators to both upgrade and downgrade services, where "services" are defined as groups of daemons/programs that work together. For example, "nfs" would be an example of a service, which would be subdivided into client and server, etc. Eivind Eklund made a prototype some time back which addressed this issue - you'd do well to take a look at that one first before reinventing the wheel :) Kris In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 7 May 2000, Doug Barton wrote: I'm going to reply to the system part of this too, replies to this thread should split off to -current. I have a design in mind for a new rc system that uses scripts with "start, stop, status" operators to both upgrade and downgrade services, where "services" are defined as groups of daemons/programs that work together. For example, "nfs" would be an example of a service, which would be subdivided into client and server, etc. Eivind Eklund made a prototype some time back which addressed this issue - you'd do well to take a look at that one first before reinventing the wheel :) Or you could use the system that NetBSD already has working. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] 381 plastic fruit for a starving nation To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Just curious, but wouldn't this be FreeSVR4??? :-) = | Kenneth Culver | FreeBSD: The best OS around.| | Unix Systems Administrator | ICQ #: 24767726 | | and student at The | AIM: muythaibxr | | The University of Maryland, | Website: (Under Construction) | | College Park. | http://www.wam.umd.edu/~culverk/| = On Tue, 9 May 2000, Tony Finch wrote: Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 7 May 2000, Doug Barton wrote: I'm going to reply to the system part of this too, replies to this thread should split off to -current. I have a design in mind for a new rc system that uses scripts with "start, stop, status" operators to both upgrade and downgrade services, where "services" are defined as groups of daemons/programs that work together. For example, "nfs" would be an example of a service, which would be subdivided into client and server, etc. Eivind Eklund made a prototype some time back which addressed this issue - you'd do well to take a look at that one first before reinventing the wheel :) Or you could use the system that NetBSD already has working. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] 381 plastic fruit for a starving nation To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Fine, you can quote historical context to argue against doing something similar to SVR4 init. I, however, see nothing wrong with making it easier to manage the daemons. Of course, that does not necessarily need to go in the rc.d scripts. This is as it should be.. "rc" files (and directories) are (in my opinion) meant to hold required configuration and startup information, NOT stuff that sends SIGHUP to Apache. Gated got it right - add a simple program (gdc) that does the extra stuff. If we could get the ports maintainers to supply a script that does the extra stuff and install it as part of the port, that could be a mild inducement on the behalf of FreeBSD. I dunno how many times I've typed "ps ax|grep dumbproc ... kill somepid dumbproc" or something like that. "restart dumbproc" would be easier, and unique enough that there wouldn't be any major naming collisions. Create system-wide "restart", "start", and "stop" scripts that the ports maintainers could plug into for those functions... Mebbe not a bad idea for half of the base system programs as well -- wouldn't change the BSD way of doing things, but would add some extra ease-of-use... Just make SURE that people don't start calling "restart lpd" from script files, as that could break things when it comes to porting to other BSD variants. mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Le 2000-05-07, Mike Nowlin écrivait :
stuff that sends SIGHUP to Apache. Gated got it right - add a simple
program (gdc) that does the extra stuff. If we could get the ports
Bind has that as well with 'ndc', and apache with apachectl.
Such helper scripts are indeed very useful, and it owuld be quite
nice to have them for the standard subsystems -- I found find
it far more convenient to type eg 'amdc restart' instead of
'killall amd . /etc/rc.conf amd -p ${amd_flags}' :)
Thomas.
--
Thomas Quinot ** Département Informatique Réseaux ** [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ENST // 46 rue Barrault // 75634 PARIS CEDEX 13
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
Will Andrews wrote: Hello, I've noticed an inconsistency among our ports. It seems that not every port that installs rc.d startup scripts includes methods to not only startup, but also shutdown and/or restart, where appropriate. (Sent to -ports for ports hackers' opinions.) Dave already mentioned the right targets, and I agree that it would be nice to have this. I have some sample stuff that I've used for quite a while that I'd be happy to clean up and share as templates. One thing we can do which will improve the situation right off the bat is standardize the code that does the pid-finding, etc. and then source those functions in each control script. Shouldn't this sort of thing be standardized? And maybe a similar method be integrated into /etc/rc for restarting base system daemons? (Sent to -current for src hackers' opinions.) I'm going to reply to the system part of this too, replies to this thread should split off to -current. I have a design in mind for a new rc system that uses scripts with "start, stop, status" operators to both upgrade and downgrade services, where "services" are defined as groups of daemons/programs that work together. For example, "nfs" would be an example of a service, which would be subdivided into client and server, etc. Unfortunately, due to the way work is going right now I haven't been left with any time for big projects of this nature. My plan was to start small with the daemons that don't have a lot of dependencies, then grow the system up through the top. If anyone wants more details about my ideas on this line, just let me know. Doug -- "Live free or die" - State motto of my ancestral homeland, New Hampshire Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
rc.d startup scripts
Hello, I've noticed an inconsistency among our ports. It seems that not every port that installs rc.d startup scripts includes methods to not only startup, but also shutdown and/or restart, where appropriate. (Sent to -ports for ports hackers' opinions.) Shouldn't this sort of thing be standardized? And maybe a similar method be integrated into /etc/rc for restarting base system daemons? (Sent to -current for src hackers' opinions.) Please continue specific discussion on either of these in their own list, or if reply is general Cc both. -- Will Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] GCS/E/S @d- s+:++:- a---+++ C++ UB P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w--- ?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++ DI+++ D+ G+ e- h! r--+++ y? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
On Sat, 6 May 2000, Will Andrews wrote:
Hello,
I've noticed an inconsistency among our ports. It seems that not every port
that installs rc.d startup scripts includes methods to not only startup,
but also shutdown and/or restart, where appropriate. (Sent to -ports for
ports hackers' opinions.)
You have answered your own question. What exists in ${PREFIX}/etc/rc.d
are startup scripts, *not* shutdown or restart scripts.
Shouldn't this sort of thing be standardized? And maybe a similar method be
integrated into /etc/rc for restarting base system daemons? (Sent to
-current for src hackers' opinions.)
You mean our init system should look like RedHat's? The OS is named
Free_BSD_ because we use not only the source code from the BSD team at
UCB, but because we practice their OS philosophy as closely as is still
relevant to the industry. We use BSD init, not SVR4, and I don't see
any reason for that to be altered.
BTW, I don't read -ports.
Brandon D. Valentine
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Illegitimi non carborundum.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: rc.d startup scripts
On Sat, May 06, 2000 at 04:15:33PM -0400, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
You have answered your own question. What exists in ${PREFIX}/etc/rc.d
are startup scripts, *not* shutdown or restart scripts.
Okay, then you think that all the ports rc.d *.sh scripts should be changed
only to allow startup, right?
You mean our init system should look like RedHat's? The OS is named
Free_BSD_ because we use not only the source code from the BSD team at
UCB, but because we practice their OS philosophy as closely as is still
relevant to the industry. We use BSD init, not SVR4, and I don't see
any reason for that to be altered.
Fine, you can quote historical context to argue against doing something
similar to SVR4 init. I, however, see nothing wrong with making it easier
to manage the daemons. Of course, that does not necessarily need to go in
the rc.d scripts.
--
Will Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GCS/E/S @d- s+:++:- a---+++ C++ UB P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w---
?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++ DI+++ D+
G+ e- h! r--+++ y?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
