Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-28 Thread Hajimu UMEMOTO

 On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 18:38:33 -0700
 Jordan Hubbard [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

jkh Sounds good to me.  My comments were, just to make it clear again,
jkh just food for thought and not out-and-out objections.  If even 47 more
jkh files in /etc is what it takes to get IPv6 fully supported, then so be
jkh it. :)

There are many discussion aboud having NetBSD style rc.d.  However, I
think it takes for a period of time.
Once, I wish to commit my changes to be in time for 4.2-RELEASE.

--
Hajimu UMEMOTO @ Internet Mutual Aid Society Yokohama, Japan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.imasy.org/~ume/


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-28 Thread Jordan Hubbard

 There are many discussion aboud having NetBSD style rc.d.  However, I
 think it takes for a period of time.
 Once, I wish to commit my changes to be in time for 4.2-RELEASE.

I think people were talking only about -current here anyway.
A NetBSD style rc.d is certainly not planned for -stable.

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-26 Thread Nik Clayton

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:56:07PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
 [redirected to just -current; I'm not sure what this has to do with -net]
 
  I agree.  I've been using them for a while on my dog slow Windows CE
  machine.  There were some minor issues when they were first committed
  to NetBSD on some platforms (due to a too early use of ps and some
  brokeness in ps on pmax, for example), but these were quickly
  resolved.
 
 So, who wants to do a proof-of-concept implementation for -current
 which integrates with our existing rc.conf mechanism?  In order to
 obey POLA, we should at least have the separate scripts switch off the
 same knobs whenever possible.

As far as I'm aware, Neil Blakey-Milner is doing just that (I'm surprised
he hasn't said so himself, although I think this week/fortnight's quite
hectic for him in the real world).

N


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-26 Thread Warner Losh

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nik Clayton writes:
: On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:56:07PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
:  [redirected to just -current; I'm not sure what this has to do with -net]
:  
:   I agree.  I've been using them for a while on my dog slow Windows CE
:   machine.  There were some minor issues when they were first committed
:   to NetBSD on some platforms (due to a too early use of ps and some
:   brokeness in ps on pmax, for example), but these were quickly
:   resolved.
:  
:  So, who wants to do a proof-of-concept implementation for -current
:  which integrates with our existing rc.conf mechanism?  In order to
:  obey POLA, we should at least have the separate scripts switch off the
:  same knobs whenever possible.
: 
: As far as I'm aware, Neil Blakey-Milner is doing just that (I'm surprised
: he hasn't said so himself, although I think this week/fortnight's quite
: hectic for him in the real world).

I'm looking forward to it.  NetBSD does have an rc.conf already and
they have recently moved to the two teir /etc/defaults/rc.conf and
/etc/rc.conf after much gnashing of teeth and beating of breasts...  I
suspect that if we move to their rc files, a similar gnashing of
teeth and beating of breasts will be played out in the mailing
lists. :-)

Warner
 


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-26 Thread Gerhard Sittig

On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 15:17 -0500, Mike Meyer wrote:
 Gerhard Sittig writes:
  What's new is:
  - include the general config at the start (and yes, in every
single script -- but this should be neglectable in terms of
speed penalty and makes them work separately, too -- which is a
real big gain!)
 
 This isn't really new; it's been nagging me for a while. Also,
 periodic.conf does this now.  I'm not convined it's negligible when
 added up over dozens of scripts.  I'm planning on taking some
 measurements to see how much this really costs. I believe I have a
 solution if it turns out to be non-negligible.

The "negligible" (you finally got what I meant :) comes IMO from
considering how often this would happen.  I really dont mind at
all if booting would take 10 more seconds or shutdown would do.
An hourly cronjob eating two more seconds (under heavy load) is
no problem at all.  And I feel these time ranges to be estimated
in a very generous way and expect them to be much lower in real
life.  I really would be surprised to be totally wrong in this
respect.  We're talking about "source"ing config and subroutine
files -- the shell text is shared and the script code (file data)
already in the cache, we just create a new process and allocate
data (copy on write helps here) and stack.

  - maybe include (source) some common code like
- determining pids belonging to program names
- starting processes in an supervised or backgrounded or any
  other special way
- have some printouts, error level summary, etc
  but I don't see FreeBSD having this level of "rc lib" as NetBSD
  has in rc.subr or even RedHat has in /etc/rc.d/functions(sp?).
  So only the sourced rc.conf (default and customized) remains.
 
 Said solutions works shell functions as well.

When you're really afraid of speed you can always do what's
usually done with C header files:

[ -z "$SOURCED_FLAG" ]  . $SOURCE_FILE

When clearing the SOURCED_FLAG variable at boot's / shutdown's
end you aren't very confused later and who fiddles with those
variables at the command line by hand gets what he deserves. :

 [ ... lib function and service script skeleton snipped ... ]


virtually yours   82D1 9B9C 01DC 4FB4 D7B4  61BE 3F49 4F77 72DE DA76
Gerhard Sittig   true | mail -s "get gpg key" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- 
 If you don't understand or are scared by any of the above
 ask your parents or an adult to help you.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



RE: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Andrea Campi

Maybe we could have a script to do the dependency check and "compile"
everything in a single big file? This script could run at boot and also
after mergemaster, whatever: it just check the modification time against a
cache file, where it also stores dependencies.

Just my Euro 0.02 ;-)

Bye,
Andrea

 -Original Message-
 From: David O'Brien [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 10:27 PM
 To: Warner Losh
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6
 
 
 On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 12:31:57PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
  The scripts themselves have the ordering dependencies.  The startup
  system runs them in the proper order.  I don't know if this is
  pre-computed or redone each boot.
 
 Redone on each boot up (and shutdown).

--
You can have it soon, cheap and working. Choose *two*, not three!

Andrea Campi
Network Administrator
World Online S.rl.
V. Montecuccoli, 20 - 20132 Milano, Italy

Tel. +39 02 483293.1
Fax. +39 02 483293.601
--


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Terry Lambert

 This was my thought also.  I put the TCP/IP scripts at 99 to make 
 sure that any slow network initialization is done.
 
 Since they all start with S - for example S99tcp - moving it
 to s99tcp will keep it from starting, and the Knnname in the same
 directory is used to stop things when moving from that run level.
 
 It's one of the things I like about the Sys V /etc/rcn.d
 directory structure, as you can easily fine tune it to fit your
 needs.  Just a look at the files and you know the order.

The primary reason I'm aware of is to support transitioning
between run levels, where some of the stuff in the previous
run level is left running.

For the increasingly anal security types, run levels would let
you support booting without a network, until after you had
battened down the hatches.  I'd never use it, in normal use,
but what the heck...


Terry Lambert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Gerhard Sittig

On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 06:04 +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
 On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, David O'Brien wrote:
 
  On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:23:40PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
   Why can't I simply write kill -1 `cat
   /var/run/sendmail.pid`?
  
  What about deamons that don't understand `kill -HUP'?
  Sendmail didn't until very reciently.
  ``/etc/rc.d/some-deamon restart'' does the right thing
  reguardless how involved that might be.
 
 Though I see your point, actually, many UNIX books, including
 some pretty old ones, refer to sending HUP signal as standard
 way of restarting/resetting daemons.

Please tell the software authors about it, too. :)  Although
there might be some form of convention, not everyone might follow
it (some might not be able even if they tried without breaking
established behaviour).  Wrapping those services will make
starting, stopping, reloading, querying status and whatever you
usually do to them easy and consistent for the user again.

BTW:  Do you know all the pidfile names and locations by heart?
Across every version and platform you are running / taking care
of?


virtually yours   82D1 9B9C 01DC 4FB4 D7B4  61BE 3F49 4F77 72DE DA76
Gerhard Sittig   true | mail -s "get gpg key" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- 
 If you don't understand or are scared by any of the above
 ask your parents or an adult to help you.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Gerhard Sittig

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 14:56 -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
 
  [ ... NetBSD (or Linux?) like rc scripts ... ]
 
 So, who wants to do a proof-of-concept implementation for
 -current which integrates with our existing rc.conf mechanism?
 In order to obey POLA, we should at least have the separate
 scripts switch off the same knobs whenever possible.

I do.  As far as I understand the new scripts typically look
something like this:

- am I (the special service) enabled?
- is my executable present?
- is my config present?
- optional:  are my prerequisited (neighbour / underlying
  services) met?
- start me up, obeying flags if present

All of this is currently done in the monolithic block, too.  I
don't see the difference yet (except for splitting the logically
distinct functions apart into "natural" groups).

What's new is:

- include the general config at the start (and yes, in every
  single script -- but this should be neglectable in terms of
  speed penalty and makes them work separately, too -- which is a
  real big gain!)
- maybe include (source) some common code like
  - determining pids belonging to program names
  - starting processes in an supervised or backgrounded or any
other special way
  - have some printouts, error level summary, etc

but I don't see FreeBSD having this level of "rc lib" as NetBSD
has in rc.subr or even RedHat has in /etc/rc.d/functions(sp?).
So only the sourced rc.conf (default and customized) remains.

The real new part eating most of the time to implement is the
shutdown path (which I understand to be somewhat absent in
FreeBSD right now, "kill -TERM everything" seems to do the job
right now).

 It's something I'd be willing to do, I guess.  I have some
 history with the rc.foo files. :)

Tell me what I can do to help.  I'm willing to contribute, too.


virtually yours   82D1 9B9C 01DC 4FB4 D7B4  61BE 3F49 4F77 72DE DA76
Gerhard Sittig   true | mail -s "get gpg key" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- 
 If you don't understand or are scared by any of the above
 ask your parents or an adult to help you.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Mike Meyer

Gerhard Sittig writes:
 On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 06:04 +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
  Though I see your point, actually, many UNIX books, including
  some pretty old ones, refer to sending HUP signal as standard
  way of restarting/resetting daemons.
 Please tell the software authors about it, too. :)  Although
 there might be some form of convention, not everyone might follow
 it (some might not be able even if they tried without breaking
 established behaviour).  Wrapping those services will make
 starting, stopping, reloading, querying status and whatever you
 usually do to them easy and consistent for the user again.

Actually, the HUP convention has been around since at least v6. As
noted, it's still not universal. The pid file convention is more
recent, and less followed. Fixing that in a startup script is easy
(and what I recommend for string daemons that use the HUP convention,
so that it can be used for the script's stop command :-).

Now, which process do I need to create a pidfile for to get my ipfw
config reloaded?

mike



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread David O'Brien

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:56:07PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
 So, who wants to do a proof-of-concept implementation for -current
 which integrates with our existing rc.conf mechanism?

I was going to if no one else did.

Who ever does it should coordinate with Luke M @ NetBSD.  He is willing
to make tweaks such that we could use as much of the NetBSD bits as
possible.  He really hopes we [BSD] can standardize on this interface.

-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread David O'Brien

On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 08:14:01PM +0200, Gerhard Sittig wrote:
 but I don't see FreeBSD having this level of "rc lib" as NetBSD
 has in rc.subr

We would import the NetBSD rc.subr.

-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread David O'Brien

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:58:08PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
 With the NetBSD stuff, this is not immediately obvious though I guess
 one could have a top level rc file with an explicit ordering similar to
 our various subdir Makefiles,

Nope.  All the /etc/rc.d/ files are scanned by `rcorder'.  `rcorder' then
creates a dependacy graph from information in each /etc/rc.d/ file.  A
walk of the graph is done to output the list of scripts in the order they
should run in.

To quote what you once wrote about `pib', the NetBSD implimentation is
"slicker than two eels screwing in a bucket of snot!" :-)

-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Garrett Wollman

Grrr !@#$^ Reply-To:...

On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 13:01:04 -0700, "David O'Brien" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

 Nope.  All the /etc/rc.d/ files are scanned by `rcorder'.  `rcorder' then
 creates a dependacy graph from information in each /etc/rc.d/ file.  A
 walk of the graph is done to output the list of scripts in the order they
 should run in.

Hmmm.  We already have a program (called `tsort') which does this
(i.e., a topological sort).  Does `rcorder' call `tsort' or does it
reinvent the wheel?

-GAWollman



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread David O'Brien

On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 09:42:23AM +0200, Andrea Campi wrote:
 Maybe we could have a script to do the dependency check and "compile"
 everything in a single big file?

Luke already has this support in NetBSD 1.5 for those who demand it, but
its a secret. ;-)

-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread David O'Brien

On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:04:13PM -0400, Garrett Wollman wrote:
 Hmmm.  We already have a program (called `tsort') which does this
 (i.e., a topological sort).  Does `rcorder' call `tsort' or does it
 reinvent the wheel?

UTSL

lynx ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD-current/src/sbin/rcorder/



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Mike Meyer

Gerhard Sittig writes:
 What's new is:
 - include the general config at the start (and yes, in every
   single script -- but this should be neglectable in terms of
   speed penalty and makes them work separately, too -- which is a
   real big gain!)

This isn't really new; it's been nagging me for a while. Also,
periodic.conf does this now.  I'm not convined it's negligible when
added up over dozens of scripts.  I'm planning on taking some
measurements to see how much this really costs. I believe I have a
solution if it turns out to be non-negligible.

 - maybe include (source) some common code like
   - determining pids belonging to program names
   - starting processes in an supervised or backgrounded or any
 other special way
   - have some printouts, error level summary, etc
 but I don't see FreeBSD having this level of "rc lib" as NetBSD
 has in rc.subr or even RedHat has in /etc/rc.d/functions(sp?).
 So only the sourced rc.conf (default and customized) remains.

Said solutions works shell functions as well.

 The real new part eating most of the time to implement is the
 shutdown path (which I understand to be somewhat absent in
 FreeBSD right now, "kill -TERM everything" seems to do the job
 right now).

Well, rc.shutdown has the appropriate loop processing in it for doing
this for the rc.d directories already. So the new part is the
per-system shutdown. That's where the shell subroutine library comes
in handy. Provide functions start/stop/reconfig that do the right
thing for the conventional single daemon subsystem like so (vertically
compressed to save space):

start() {
eval command="\$${name}_program \$${name}_flags"
command 
echo $!  /var/run/${name}.pid
echo -n " $name"
}

stop() {
kill -TERM /var/run/${name}.pid
echo -n " $name"
}

config() {
kill -HUP /var/run/${name}.pid
}

run()
eval check="\$${name}_enable"
case "${check}" in
[Yy][Ee][Ss]) run="yes" ;;
[Nn][Oo]) run="no" ;;
esac

case "$1" in
start) if [ "$run" = "yes" ]; then start(); fi ;;
stop) if [ "$run" = "yes" ]; then stop(); fi ;;
config) if [ "$run" = "yes" ]; then config(); fi ;;
*) echo "Usage: $0 [ start | stop | config ] $12 ;;
esac
}

Then simple daemons turn into:

#!/bin/sh
#
# PROVIDES: foobar
# REQUIRES: ...
# ...

name=foobar

. /etc/rc.setup

run

Breaking out the seperate functions allows you to change just part of
it easily. For example, if the daemon creates a pid, or the flags to
it, you'd do:

#!/bin/sh
# ...

name=smartbar

. /etc/rc.setup

start() {
$foobar_program $foobar_flags 
echo -n " foobar"
}

run

Some things are hairy enough to require doing everything over, and
there is probably a better way to organize the subroutines, but that's
the general idea.

The next step is to get ports authors to start using /etc/rc.setup or
whatever it gets called :-).

mike


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Garrett Wollman

Grrr !@#%$^ Reply-To: header

On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 13:13:53 -0700, "David O'Brien" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

 (i.e., a topological sort).  Does `rcorder' call `tsort' or does it
 reinvent the wheel?

 UTSL

You could have simply answered the question.  For the benefit of
everyone else: yes, it reinvents the wheel.

-GAWollman



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Jordan Hubbard

 I was going to if no one else did.
 
 Who ever does it should coordinate with Luke M @ NetBSD.  He is willing
 to make tweaks such that we could use as much of the NetBSD bits as
 possible.  He really hopes we [BSD] can standardize on this interface.

Well, it sounds like David is already working with Luke on this
so why don't we just tag him as "it" and get past the deadlock
on this one. :)

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Terry Lambert

  (i.e., a topological sort).  Does `rcorder' call `tsort' or does it
  reinvent the wheel?
 
  UTSL
 
 You could have simply answered the question.  For the benefit of
 everyone else: yes, it reinvents the wheel.

I personally don't have a problem with this; tsort should be
a library routine referenced by both tsort(1) and rcorder(8),
of course, but the way tsort(1) works, there is really no
easy way to use it to do the job in any reasonable amount of
time.

As far as wheel reinvention goes, we should add gcc, ld, and
make to the list of programs reinventing the tsort wheel...
kinda calls out for a library routine; wait, I already said
that once... 8-).


Terry Lambert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-25 Thread Brian O'Shea

On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 06:04:43AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
 On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, David O'Brien wrote:
 
  On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:23:40PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
   Why can't I simply write kill -1 `cat /var/run/sendmail.pid`?
  
  What about deamons that don't understand `kill -HUP'?  Sendmail didn't
  until very reciently.  ``/etc/rc.d/some-deamon restart'' does the right
  thing reguardless how involved that might be.
 
 Though I see your point, actually, many UNIX books, including some pretty
 old ones, refer to sending HUP signal as standard way of
 restarting/resetting daemons.

Using the `kill -HUP` method, how do you deal with the dependency
issues that people have been mentioning in this thread?

-brian

-- 
Brian O'Shea
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Mike Meyer

Garrett Rooney writes:
 On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:49:40AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
  Well, would not be this stepping aside from BSD startup sequence, which we
  all know and love?  Having dozens of small files instead of pair of
  big ones always frustrates me when I have to work with linux.
 and at the very least, with a number of smaller files, assuming they're
 named well, you can find what you're looking for faster, and not have
 to dig though the one monolithic script to find out how sometihng is
 working.

Well, we *already* have over a dozen /etc/rc.* files on -current.  And
we *don't* have the advantage of a consistent interface to control all
the functions in /etc/rc. If you break things up, then if you need to
restart the mail server, just go "/etc/rc.d/sendmail restart". dhcpd?
"/etc/rc.d/sendmail/dhcpd restart". Etc.

Of course, for consistency ports should be tweaked to use have the
same provides/requires setup, and use rc.subr instead of the homegrown
hacks.

Which brings up the real downside of doing this - you have to parse
rc.subr and rc.conf for *every* one of those scripts.

mike


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Terry Lambert

  One of the reasons for the numbers in the SysVR4 arena is to
  set the order of execution so programs which other depend upon
  are executed first.  How does the NetBSD solve this problem.
 
 Very coolly.  The main rc script runs a script named `rcorder' to
 generate the proper order.  rc.shutdown also uses `rcorder' but reverses
 the ordering.  Two examples are included below to show what `rcorder'
 uses to generate the list.  These NetBSD rc files also provide "start",
 "stop", "restart", "status", etc. commands to assist the sysadmin.
 Again, *very* slick and still quite BSD-like.

[ ... ]

 # PROVIDE: ypbind
 # REQUIRE: ypserv

One thing that surfaced frequently in a discussion of a similar
system was hard vs. soft requirements.

Specifically, I can run sendmail without a syslogd running, so
it is not a hard requirement, but I would prefer that it be
there so that I can log things.

There is a similar non-requirement for bind to start sendmail,
if you have it configured to not probe interfaces, which is a
good idea for dial-on-demand configurations, but to provide
service to a remote system, it needs bind around.

So along with "PROVIDE" and "REQUIRE", there's a need for "WANT";
it could be used as a tie-breaker for circular dependency lists,
if such occur.


Similarly, there is a need for a "config", as well as a "start",
"stop", "restart", and "Status".  For well written software,
this would end up being a NOOP, since it would not cache config
data, but would instead obtain it each time (an example of bad
caching is sendmail source host name caching, when an ISP supports
DNSUPDAT based on RADIUS audit events: if the machine claims to
be named something different than the ISP assigned DNS name such
that forward and reverse mappings don't match, the ISP will reject
attempts to relay email from valid customers).

Yeah, in a perfect world, everyone would have a static IP address,
and sendmail would have a knob to make it do a gethostbyaddr() for
each time that it wanted to say "HELO", etc., etc..


Oh... and the PROVIDE/REQUIRE/WANT lists really, really want to
be "per service name" rather than per program name, so I could,
for example, have a service that depends on "smtpserv", and not
care if it was sendmail or qmail or whatever, only that there
was a protocol aware program sitting on the SMTP port, waiting
for a connection.


Terry Lambert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Terry Lambert

 I like the concept of them quite a bit.  I think it definitely shows
 some thought on how to keep the advantages of each system.  I would
 support a move toward a system like this.  One thing that would be nice
 is a database somewhere of which of services from /etc/rc.d are running.

I think this is what "status" is for...


Terry Lambert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Terry Lambert

 Well, would not be this stepping aside from BSD startup sequence, which we
 all know and love?  Having dozens of small files instead of pair of
 big ones always frustrates me when I have to work with linux.

Install a binary package that needs to be started when the
system is booted and needs to be shutdown when the system
is shutdown.

Now consider yourself as a software vendor, such as "Oracle" or
"Lucent", trying to easily distribute database software or a
WinModem binary-only third-party licensed codec for FreeBSD.

Despite its age, "sed" is not your friend.


Terry Lambert
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Alexey Dokuchaev

On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Terry Lambert wrote:

  Well, would not be this stepping aside from BSD startup sequence, which we
  all know and love?  Having dozens of small files instead of pair of
  big ones always frustrates me when I have to work with linux.
 
 Install a binary package that needs to be started when the
 system is booted and needs to be shutdown when the system
 is shutdown.

That's what /usr/local/etc/rc.d/ was for for years!  Put all your
application-specific scripts there, but leave base-system monotilithic
startup alone :-)

--
WBR,
DAN Fe



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Alexey Dokuchaev

 Well, we *already* have over a dozen /etc/rc.* files on -current.  And
 we *don't* have the advantage of a consistent interface to control all
 the functions in /etc/rc. If you break things up, then if you need to
 restart the mail server, just go "/etc/rc.d/sendmail restart". dhcpd?
 "/etc/rc.d/sendmail/dhcpd restart". Etc.

Actually, the point is that writing TONS of scripts to get your work
done (that's what Linux world does) always pissed me off.  You have a
shell script that is in fact a wrapper for another shell script, and like
this in turn it goes on and on and on again.  Icky! :-)  I don't like
how Linux smells.

Why can't I simply write kill -1 `cat /var/run/sendmail.pid`?  I don't
consider it being sagnificantly longer than writing /etc/rc.d/sendmail
restart.  After all, if your typing speed is good enough, it doesn't
really matter whether you type in 30 or 20 chars.

--
JMHO,
DAN Fe



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Mike Meyer

Alexey Dokuchaev writes:
  Well, we *already* have over a dozen /etc/rc.* files on -current.  And
  we *don't* have the advantage of a consistent interface to control all
  the functions in /etc/rc. If you break things up, then if you need to
  restart the mail server, just go "/etc/rc.d/sendmail restart". dhcpd?
  "/etc/rc.d/sendmail/dhcpd restart". Etc.
 Actually, the point is that writing TONS of scripts to get your work
 done (that's what Linux world does) always pissed me off.  You have a
 shell script that is in fact a wrapper for another shell script, and like
 this in turn it goes on and on and on again.  Icky! :-)  I don't like
 how Linux smells.

Well, I don't like Linux much either. On the other hand, I hate
dealing with a lots of little things all of which are just slightly
different from each other even more - and the latter is what you get
from /etc/rc.

 Why can't I simply write kill -1 `cat /var/run/sendmail.pid`?  I don't
 consider it being sagnificantly longer than writing /etc/rc.d/sendmail
 restart.  After all, if your typing speed is good enough, it doesn't
 really matter whether you type in 30 or 20 chars.

You can still do that. However, do you know how to get everything
listed in /etc/defaults/rc.conf to reread it's config file? With the
approach being advocated, the answer is "yes" - even if you don't know
whether or not the daemon in question *has* a config file. That's the
thing I like about all those scripts (SysV, linux, whatever) - I
didn't have to deal with cruft like that.

Yeah, for some things, this means you wind up running a script that's
a wrapper for the vendor-provided script to make it meet your
standards. If you really hate that, ignore the vendors script and talk
directly to the application - but they get little enough use that I'd
rather use the vendor's API and let it be wasteful. After all, if they
got a lot of use, having different interface wouldn't be a problem.

mike





To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Garrett Rooney

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 08:59:36AM +, Terry Lambert wrote:
 Oh... and the PROVIDE/REQUIRE/WANT lists really, really want to
 be "per service name" rather than per program name, so I could,
 for example, have a service that depends on "smtpserv", and not
 care if it was sendmail or qmail or whatever, only that there
 was a protocol aware program sitting on the SMTP port, waiting
 for a connection.

i believe, from the quick look i took at this last night, that this is
the way it is done, at least for mail servers, as there seems to be
provisions for both sendmail and postfix (well, i remember postfix
specifically, and i assume sendmail was there).

-- 
garrett rooney   my pid is inigo montoya.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] you kill -9 my parent process.
http://electricjellyfish.net/prepare to vi.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Christopher Masto

The solution is very simple.  Put a statically linked Perl in /sbin,
and write the startup system in Perl.  For user convenience, it should
have a Gnome interface and a PostgreSQL backend, so we should also
put X and pgsql in /sbin.
-- 
Christopher Masto Senior Network Monkey  NetMonger Communications
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.netmonger.net

Free yourself, free your machine, free the daemon -- http://www.freebsd.org/


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Rogier R. Mulhuijzen

/me hands Chris SARCASM and /SARCASM

 DocWilco

At 13:50 24-10-2000 -0400, you wrote:
The solution is very simple.  Put a statically linked Perl in /sbin,
and write the startup system in Perl.  For user convenience, it should
have a Gnome interface and a PostgreSQL backend, so we should also
put X and pgsql in /sbin.
--
Christopher Masto Senior Network Monkey  NetMonger Communications
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.netmonger.net

Free yourself, free your machine, free the daemon -- http://www.freebsd.org/


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: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Warner Losh

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "David O'Brien" writes:
: At BSDcon Luke M showed me what the NetBSD 1.5 rc files look like.
: They've moved them all to /etc/rc.d/ and made them very granular (as
: SVR4, but w/o leading numbers in the filenames).  The NetBSD
: implementation also solved all the issues people have brought up in the
: past -- dependacies, etc...
: 
: We should just move to using their rc code.

I agree.  I've been using them for a while on my dog slow Windows CE
machine.  There were some minor issues when they were first committed
to NetBSD on some platforms (due to a too early use of ps and some
brokeness in ps on pmax, for example), but these were quickly
resolved.

Warner



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Warner Losh

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bill Vermillion writes:
: One of the reasons for the numbers in the SysVR4 arena is to
: set the order of execution so programs which other depend upon
: are executed first.  How does the NetBSD solve this problem.

The scripts themselves have the ordering dependencies.  The startup
system runs them in the proper order.  I don't know if this is
pre-computed or redone each boot.  Turns out to be fairly cheap to
do.  I'd check, but my netbsd box is currently off the net since I've
not setit back up after BSDcon.

Warner


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Warner Losh

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Matthew N. Dodd" 
writes:
: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
:  Well if you're that stubborn there's no reason that the "new" layout
:  could not be compiled into a monolithic script.  In fact perhaps you
:  could be the one to step forward and write the code to compile that
:  script.  ;-)
: 
: Indeed, given the slowdowns NetBSD enountered when switching to the new
: system due to all of the shell processes being created.

which slowdowns were these?  Even on older pmax system the boot time
wasn't increased too much, once they fixed a couple of bugs in the
NetBSD/pmax port...

Warner


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Warner Losh

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Jacques A. Vidrine" writes:
: By the way, the author of this stuff (Luke Mewburn) says he'll post a
: summary of the design and implementation issues to this list in a few
: days.

I talked to Luke at BSDcon about many issues.  He's very keen on
increasing the cooperation between the two projects.  If we find
issues with /etc/rc.d(NetSBD), then I'm fairly sure that he'd be
willing to work with us on them.

Warner


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Gerhard Sittig

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 16:14 +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
 On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Terry Lambert wrote:
 
   Well, would not be this stepping aside from BSD startup
   sequence, which we all know and love?  Having dozens of
   small files instead of pair of big ones always frustrates
   me when I have to work with linux.
  
  Install a binary package that needs to be started when the
  system is booted and needs to be shutdown when the system is
  shutdown.
 
 That's what /usr/local/etc/rc.d/ was for for years!  Put all
 your application-specific scripts there, but leave base-system
 monotilithic startup alone :-)

What if I don't employ bind but use something else (djbdns or
homebrew software) instead?  Where do I put those in into the
startup sequence?  When /usr/local/etc/rc.d/*.sh are run it could
be too late since on the way there a few services died due to DNS
errors.

What about other "essential" services like foreign file systems
("unnatural" things like coda?) or mail transfer agents likely to
be used / needed before other things happen but not available in
the base?  What if I want to load some UPS daemon quite early?
How do I implement hardcoded ARP tables short after NIC setup and
right before services' startup?  What about other hacks one had
to introduce into /etc/rc*?  Think of the ipf "workaround" in PR
20202.  It could have been as easy as adding one more file or
replacing the ipfw counterpart.  At the moment it is about having
someone stuff the code into some other environment.  Without easy
moving around in case it's wrongly placed (think of 30 lines
deleted and 30 lines added - without the chance to easily see if
they're still the same and just have moved - against one line
deleted and one line added - more obviously documenting a moved
invocation).

Plugging (dropping) in just another script and have it register
its sequence number somewhere (or replacing an existing one) is
always easier than modifying a huge pile of code.

And think about undoing those additions (insertions) upon
removal:  deleting a single file is really trivial compared to
identifying and removing a chunk in a big file.  And changing
your mind about what to do and how to do it for a certain service
won't interfere with all the other stuff.

I don't like thinking back of the situation, where I had to start
a (usually not running) NFS server and a NFS client for remote
installworlds.  Eyeballing nested rc scripts, comparing them
against the rc.conf settings and typing all those by hand and not
missing something is really not what you want to have when you
actually have other worries to take care of.  And then again -
how do I kill this damned special daemon in a clear way?  Of
course every one of them has a way and if you're lucky it's only
five ways for seven services, but that's still too much of a
complexity for a simple human mind with its given restrictions.

Think of the run-parts layout in the cronjob directories and the
advantages are (should be) really obvious.  The "clutter" with
the symlinks in Linux come from the notion of having runlevels,
BTW.  For BSD (simple straight bootup, endless run and simple
straight shutdown, with a little change sometimes as new services
are needed or not needed any longer) there should either be no
links and a sequence description or just one pile of "numbered
links" besides the "basename'd, plain working" scripts.

BTW:  When I wouldn't like those many single files I would
honestly think about combining all the source code into one or at
most two files. :)  What are all those header files good for if
not for causing the preprocessor to parse them over and over for
no real gain after the first time?  This analogy might
demonstrate best what modularity is able to gain, and that
devoting processing power for tedious routine jobs can free human
resources for other jobs at a more abstract level (i.e. closer to
solving "the real" problem instead of unnecessarily fiddling with
boring details and introducing dull new errors).


virtually yours   82D1 9B9C 01DC 4FB4 D7B4  61BE 3F49 4F77 72DE DA76
Gerhard Sittig   true | mail -s "get gpg key" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- 
 If you don't understand or are scared by any of the above
 ask your parents or an adult to help you.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread David O'Brien

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 05:05:49AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
 Still, it would be better if I could choose between "classical" and "new"
 startup layout, say, somewhere at the installation stage.

Supporting two very different schemes is a support nightmare.  And
giveing good test coverage with our current resources would also be a
problem.
 
-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread David O'Brien

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:49:40AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
 Having dozens of small files instead of pair of big ones always
 frustrates me when I have to work with linux.

Maybe, but the greatly increased functionality makes it worth it.
 
-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread David O'Brien

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 08:21:39PM -0400, Matthew N. Dodd wrote:
 There isn't any reason why rc.conf shouldn't continue to be useful in
 either case.
 
/etc/rc.conf and /etc/defaults/rc.conf are still used in the NetBSD 1.5
world.

-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread David O'Brien

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:23:40PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
 Why can't I simply write kill -1 `cat /var/run/sendmail.pid`?

What about deamons that don't understand `kill -HUP'?  Sendmail didn't
until very reciently.  ``/etc/rc.d/some-deamon restart'' does the right
thing reguardless how involved that might be.

-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread David O'Brien

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 12:31:57PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
 The scripts themselves have the ordering dependencies.  The startup
 system runs them in the proper order.  I don't know if this is
 pre-computed or redone each boot.

Redone on each boot up (and shutdown).

-- 
-- David  ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Jordan Hubbard

[redirected to just -current; I'm not sure what this has to do with -net]

 I agree.  I've been using them for a while on my dog slow Windows CE
 machine.  There were some minor issues when they were first committed
 to NetBSD on some platforms (due to a too early use of ps and some
 brokeness in ps on pmax, for example), but these were quickly
 resolved.

So, who wants to do a proof-of-concept implementation for -current
which integrates with our existing rc.conf mechanism?  In order to
obey POLA, we should at least have the separate scripts switch off the
same knobs whenever possible.

It's something I'd be willing to do, I guess.  I have some history
with the rc.foo files. :)

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Jordan Hubbard

 The scripts themselves have the ordering dependencies.  The startup
 system runs them in the proper order.  I don't know if this is
 pre-computed or redone each boot.

I'm really curious about this, myself.  One of the reasons the SYSV
scripts have the numeric prefix is so that you know exactly what order
things will be started in.  With the NetBSD stuff, this is not
immediately obvious though I guess one could have a top level rc file
with an explicit ordering similar to our various subdir Makefiles,
but that also gives you another location to edit when dropping
in a new startup file.

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Garrett Rooney

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:58:08PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
  The scripts themselves have the ordering dependencies.  The startup
  system runs them in the proper order.  I don't know if this is
  pre-computed or redone each boot.
 
 I'm really curious about this, myself.  One of the reasons the SYSV
 scripts have the numeric prefix is so that you know exactly what order
 things will be started in.  With the NetBSD stuff, this is not
 immediately obvious though I guess one could have a top level rc file
 with an explicit ordering similar to our various subdir Makefiles,
 but that also gives you another location to edit when dropping
 in a new startup file.

well, assuming you specify all the necessary dependencies, does it
really matter what the specific order is?

i mean i always thought of the numbers in SYSV script names as a hack to
preserve dependencies, rather than a way to preserve a specific order.
the order only needs to exist to preserve dependencies, unless i'm
missing something.

-- 
garrett rooney   my pid is inigo montoya.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] you kill -9 my parent process.
http://electricjellyfish.net/prepare to vi.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Garrett Rooney

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:58:08PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
  The scripts themselves have the ordering dependencies.  The startup
  system runs them in the proper order.  I don't know if this is
  pre-computed or redone each boot.
 
 I'm really curious about this, myself.  One of the reasons the SYSV
 scripts have the numeric prefix is so that you know exactly what order
 things will be started in.  With the NetBSD stuff, this is not
 immediately obvious though I guess one could have a top level rc file
 with an explicit ordering similar to our various subdir Makefiles,
 but that also gives you another location to edit when dropping
 in a new startup file.

and, to reply a second time to this message, it is recomputed at each
boot...  the rc and rc.shutdown scripts both run rcorder to do it, with
rc.shutdown reversing the order.

-- 
garrett rooney   my pid is inigo montoya.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] you kill -9 my parent process.
http://electricjellyfish.net/prepare to vi.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Bill Vermillion


On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:58:08PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard thus spoke:
  The scripts themselves have the ordering dependencies.  The startup
  system runs them in the proper order.  I don't know if this is
  pre-computed or redone each boot.

 I'm really curious about this, myself.  One of the reasons the SYSV
 scripts have the numeric prefix is so that you know exactly what order
 things will be started in.  With the NetBSD stuff, this is not
 immediately obvious though I guess one could have a top level rc file
 with an explicit ordering similar to our various subdir Makefiles,
 but that also gives you another location to edit when dropping
 in a new startup file.

This was my thought also.  I put the TCP/IP scripts at 99 to make 
sure that any slow network initialization is done.

Since they all start with S - for example S99tcp - moving it
to s99tcp will keep it from starting, and the Knnname in the same
directory is used to stop things when moving from that run level.

It's one of the things I like about the Sys V /etc/rcn.d
directory structure, as you can easily fine tune it to fit your
needs.  Just a look at the files and you know the order.

Bill
-- 
Bill Vermillion -   bv @ wjv . com
-- 
Bill Vermillion -   bv @ wjv . com


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Mike Meyer

Jordan Hubbard writes:
 [redirected to just -current; I'm not sure what this has to do with -net]
  I agree.  I've been using them for a while on my dog slow Windows CE
  machine.  There were some minor issues when they were first committed
  to NetBSD on some platforms (due to a too early use of ps and some
  brokeness in ps on pmax, for example), but these were quickly
  resolved.
 So, who wants to do a proof-of-concept implementation for -current
 which integrates with our existing rc.conf mechanism?  In order to
 obey POLA, we should at least have the separate scripts switch off the
 same knobs whenever possible.

I'm in the midst of trying to install NetBSD so I can look at this. If
no one else steps forward to do it, I can put together a patch.

mike



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Rogier R. Mulhuijzen


So, who wants to do a proof-of-concept implementation for -current
which integrates with our existing rc.conf mechanism?  In order to
obey POLA, we should at least have the separate scripts switch off the
same knobs whenever possible.

It's something I'd be willing to do, I guess.  I have some history
with the rc.foo files. :)

I'm rather new to -current, but I'd be willing to be junior hacker on this 
project. I'm rather fond of shell script hacking and other languages come 
easily to me too.

 DocWilco



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Alexey Dokuchaev

On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, David O'Brien wrote:

 On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:23:40PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
  Why can't I simply write kill -1 `cat /var/run/sendmail.pid`?
 
 What about deamons that don't understand `kill -HUP'?  Sendmail didn't
 until very reciently.  ``/etc/rc.d/some-deamon restart'' does the right
 thing reguardless how involved that might be.

Though I see your point, actually, many UNIX books, including some pretty
old ones, refer to sending HUP signal as standard way of
restarting/resetting daemons.


./danfe



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Jordan Hubbard

 and, to reply a second time to this message, it is recomputed at each
 boot...  the rc and rc.shutdown scripts both run rcorder to do it, with
 rc.shutdown reversing the order.

Ah, OK, sorry - I must have missed this the first time around.
I'll have to investigate the workings of rcorder then.

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Jordan Hubbard

 I'm in the midst of trying to install NetBSD so I can look at this. If
 no one else steps forward to do it, I can put together a patch.

I've had several replies, so why don't we all look into this a bit and
see which one of us actually manages to have enough steam to do it
after the analysis period is over. :)

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Garance A Drosihn

At 2:58 PM -0700 10/24/00, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
  The scripts themselves have the ordering dependencies.  The
  startup system runs them in the proper order.  I don't know
  if this is pre-computed or redone each boot.

I'm really curious about this, myself.  One of the reasons the SYSV
scripts have the numeric prefix is so that you know exactly what order
things will be started in.  With the NetBSD stuff, this is not
immediately obvious though I guess one could have a top level rc file
with an explicit ordering similar to our various subdir Makefiles,
but that also gives you another location to edit when dropping
in a new startup file.

One should have some other script that you could run, which
would look thru all the rc files and just list which order
they will be run at startup (or at shutdown).  That way you
could find out the order for a given set of scripts without
having to actually startup or shutdown...

(I have no idea how netbsd does it, I'm just saying that I
would think some other script should be provided which
could list out the proper order without actually running
any of the scripts...)


---
Garance Alistair Drosehn   =   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Programmer  or  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-24 Thread Garrett Rooney

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 11:04:55PM -0400, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
 One should have some other script that you could run, which
 would look thru all the rc files and just list which order
 they will be run at startup (or at shutdown).  That way you
 could find out the order for a given set of scripts without
 having to actually startup or shutdown...
 
 (I have no idea how netbsd does it, I'm just saying that I
 would think some other script should be provided which
 could list out the proper order without actually running
 any of the scripts...)

since i've been playing with the tools a little in my copious spare
time, you could determine that using the rcorder tool that they actually
use to get the order in the rc script.

just run 'rcorder /etc/rc.d/*' and it'll output the order they should
start up in.  reverse that order for shutdown.

this system looks more and more swank every time i look at it.

-- 
garrett rooney   my pid is inigo montoya.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] you kill -9 my parent process.
http://electricjellyfish.net/prepare to vi.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Brian O'Shea

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 01:05:27AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
 On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 09:41:51PM -0400, Bill Vermillion wrote:
  One of the reasons for the numbers in the SysVR4 arena is to
  set the order of execution so programs which other depend upon
  are executed first.  How does the NetBSD solve this problem.
 
 Very coolly.  The main rc script runs a script named `rcorder' to
 generate the proper order.  rc.shutdown also uses `rcorder' but reverses
 the ordering.  Two examples are included below to show what `rcorder'
 uses to generate the list.  These NetBSD rc files also provide "start",
 "stop", "restart", "status", etc. commands to assist the sysadmin.
 Again, *very* slick and still quite BSD-like.

Sounds interesting.  To add a new rc script to the system, do you have
to add an entry to an "rc order list" somewhere (in addition to adding
the new script)?  How is that handled?  The nice (or clumsy, depending
on your point of view) part about the SysV way is that the order in
which the rc scripts are executed is implicit in the scripts' names.
Of course, they have added a symlink maze (worse, hard links on HP-UX)
on top of that, making it tedious to maintain rc scripts by hand
(maybe that was by design).

[snip]

-- 
Brian O'Shea
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Brandon D. Valentine

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Brian O'Shea wrote:

Sounds interesting.  To add a new rc script to the system, do you have
to add an entry to an "rc order list" somewhere (in addition to adding
the new script)?  How is that handled?  The nice (or clumsy, depending
on your point of view) part about the SysV way is that the order in
which the rc scripts are executed is implicit in the scripts' names.
Of course, they have added a symlink maze (worse, hard links on HP-UX)
on top of that, making it tedious to maintain rc scripts by hand
(maybe that was by design).

Hmm I don't have any NetBSD machines running the later 1.5 revisions
yet, so I've not seen the new scripts, but I would say that adding a new
script to a list of rc files would be much less hassle than adding an
entry in a monolithic /etc/rc to process that new file.

-- 
Brandon D. Valentine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a
good example."  --  Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Brian O'Shea

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 05:07:42PM -0400, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
 On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Brian O'Shea wrote:
 
 Sounds interesting.  To add a new rc script to the system, do you have
 to add an entry to an "rc order list" somewhere (in addition to adding
 the new script)?  How is that handled?  The nice (or clumsy, depending
 on your point of view) part about the SysV way is that the order in
 which the rc scripts are executed is implicit in the scripts' names.
 Of course, they have added a symlink maze (worse, hard links on HP-UX)
 on top of that, making it tedious to maintain rc scripts by hand
 (maybe that was by design).
 
 Hmm I don't have any NetBSD machines running the later 1.5 revisions
 yet, so I've not seen the new scripts, but I would say that adding a new
 script to a list of rc files would be much less hassle than adding an
 entry in a monolithic /etc/rc to process that new file.
 

I agree.  However, I was comparing it to the SysV rc script format,
not to the existing BSD rc scripts.

-brian

-- 
Brian O'Shea
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread David O'Brien

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 05:07:42PM -0400, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
 Hmm I don't have any NetBSD machines running the later 1.5 revisions
 yet, so I've not seen the new scripts,

lynx ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD-current/src/etc/rc.d/



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Brandon D. Valentine

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, David O'Brien wrote:

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 05:07:42PM -0400, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
 Hmm I don't have any NetBSD machines running the later 1.5 revisions
 yet, so I've not seen the new scripts,

lynx ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD-current/src/etc/rc.d/

Thanks, I was gonna go find those after I finished what I was doing, but
you've saved me a few keystrokes.  =)

I like the concept of them quite a bit.  I think it definitely shows
some thought on how to keep the advantages of each system.  I would
support a move toward a system like this.  One thing that would be nice
is a database somewhere of which of services from /etc/rc.d are running.
This would enable one to build a nice GUI or curses based tool for
showing the services running, and allowing for the stopping, starting,
and restarting of those services.  Basically just add a feature such
that after a service is started, the pid is written to a universally
standard directory for all rc controlled services.  That would be
sufficient.  It would then be nice to write such a tool, manipulatable
either via command line options or an interactive curses mode, which
would manage those services.  Sort of the equivalent of SysV's chkconfig
command, but actually useful.  =)  So that one could say:
rccntl amd restart
or just run rccntrl and get a curses window displaying the services in
/etc/rc.d currently started and possibly another window showing those
not started, and the option to move a service from one list to the
other, thereby starting to stopping it, as well the option to just
restart it.

-- 
Brandon D. Valentine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a
good example."  --  Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Garrett Rooney

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 02:25:40PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
 On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 05:07:42PM -0400, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
  Hmm I don't have any NetBSD machines running the later 1.5 revisions
  yet, so I've not seen the new scripts,
 
 lynx ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD-current/src/etc/rc.d/

wow, that's really cool.  i've always prefered BSD init versus SysV, but
they seem to have gotten the best of both worlds.  hope someone whith
the clout to make it happen jumps on it and gets it ported over, cause
that seems like something that's too useful to not use.

-- 
garrett rooney   my pid is inigo montoya.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] you kill -9 my parent process.
http://electricjellyfish.net/prepare to vi.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Alexey Dokuchaev

On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, David O'Brien wrote:

 On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 11:05:37AM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
   I wish to update rc.network6 and introduce rc.firewall6.
  
  H.  I must confess that I see /etc as getting rather cluttered
  these days.  Is there no way to perhaps collapse some of the most
  related functionality into single files and start passing arguments
  or something?  Just a comment..
 
 At BSDcon Luke M showed me what the NetBSD 1.5 rc files look like.
 They've moved them all to /etc/rc.d/ and made them very granular (as
 SVR4, but w/o leading numbers in the filenames).  The NetBSD
 implementation also solved all the issues people have brought up in the
 past -- dependacies, etc...
 
 We should just move to using their rc code.

Well, would not be this stepping aside from BSD startup sequence, which we
all know and love?  Having dozens of small files instead of pair of
big ones always frustrates me when I have to work with linux.

--
With all due respect,
DAN Fe



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Garrett Rooney

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:49:40AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
 Well, would not be this stepping aside from BSD startup sequence, which we
 all know and love?  Having dozens of small files instead of pair of
 big ones always frustrates me when I have to work with linux.

well, it's a single directory full of small files, as opposed to a bunch
of directories, each with its own collection of files, with ugly numbers
at the beginning of each one.  that's better in my book.

and at the very least, with a number of smaller files, assuming they're
named well, you can find what you're looking for faster, and not have
to dig though the one monolithic script to find out how sometihng is
working.

-- 
garrett rooney   my pid is inigo montoya.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] you kill -9 my parent process.
http://electricjellyfish.net/prepare to vi.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Alexey Dokuchaev

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Garrett Rooney wrote:

 On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:49:40AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
  Well, would not be this stepping aside from BSD startup sequence, which we
  all know and love?  Having dozens of small files instead of pair of
  big ones always frustrates me when I have to work with linux.
 
 well, it's a single directory full of small files, as opposed to a bunch
 of directories, each with its own collection of files, with ugly numbers
 at the beginning of each one.  that's better in my book.
 
 and at the very least, with a number of smaller files, assuming they're
 named well, you can find what you're looking for faster, and not have
 to dig though the one monolithic script to find out how sometihng is
 working.

Still, it would be better if I could choose between "classical" and "new"
startup layout, say, somewhere at the installation stage.

--
With best and kind regards,
DAN Fe



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Brandon D. Valentine

On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:

Still, it would be better if I could choose between "classical" and "new"
startup layout, say, somewhere at the installation stage.

Well if you're that stubborn there's no reason that the "new" layout
could not be compiled into a monolithic script.  In fact perhaps you
could be the one to step forward and write the code to compile that
script.  ;-)

-- 
Brandon D. Valentine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a
good example."  --  Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Alexey Dokuchaev

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:

 On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
 
 Still, it would be better if I could choose between "classical" and "new"
 startup layout, say, somewhere at the installation stage.
 
 Well if you're that stubborn there's no reason that the "new" layout
 could not be compiled into a monolithic script.  In fact perhaps you
 could be the one to step forward and write the code to compile that
 script.  ;-)

That's an idea!  Gotta co recent -CURRENT right now!

--
./danfe




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Garrett Rooney

On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 05:26:07AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
 On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
 
  On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
  
  Still, it would be better if I could choose between "classical" and "new"
  startup layout, say, somewhere at the installation stage.
  
  Well if you're that stubborn there's no reason that the "new" layout
  could not be compiled into a monolithic script.  In fact perhaps you
  could be the one to step forward and write the code to compile that
  script.  ;-)
 
 That's an idea!  Gotta co recent -CURRENT right now!

might want to port the netbsd code first, since AFAIK this stuff isn't
in current ;-)

i imagine it won't take much though...  just tweaking the scripts to
make sure they all do the right thing on a FreeBSD box.

and it seems like compiling a monolithic script should be simple
enough...  maybe i'll look at it in my copious spare time...

-- 
garrett rooney   my pid is inigo montoya.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] you kill -9 my parent process.
http://electricjellyfish.net/prepare to vi.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Brandon D. Valentine

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Garrett Rooney wrote:

 That's an idea!  Gotta co recent -CURRENT right now!

might want to port the netbsd code first, since AFAIK this stuff isn't
in current ;-)

Indeed it's not, but nice to seem him so eager.  =)

-- 
Brandon D. Valentine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a
good example."  --  Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Matthew N. Dodd

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
 Well if you're that stubborn there's no reason that the "new" layout
 could not be compiled into a monolithic script.  In fact perhaps you
 could be the one to step forward and write the code to compile that
 script.  ;-)

Indeed, given the slowdowns NetBSD enountered when switching to the new
system due to all of the shell processes being created.

There isn't any reason why rc.conf shouldn't continue to be useful in
either case.

-- 
| Matthew N. Dodd  | '78 Datsun 280Z | '75 Volvo 164E | FreeBSD/NetBSD  |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |   2 x '84 Volvo 245DL| ix86,sparc,pmax |
| http://www.jurai.net/~winter | This Space For Rent  | ISO8802.5 4ever |



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-23 Thread Jacques A. Vidrine

On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 02:25:40PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
 On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 05:07:42PM -0400, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
  Hmm I don't have any NetBSD machines running the later 1.5 revisions
  yet, so I've not seen the new scripts,
 
 lynx ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD-current/src/etc/rc.d/

By the way, the author of this stuff (Luke Mewburn) says he'll post a
summary of the design and implementation issues to this list in a few
days.
-- 
Jacques Vidrine / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-22 Thread Bill Vermillion

On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 03:39:57PM -0700, David O'Brien thus spoke:
 On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 11:05:37AM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote:
   I wish to update rc.network6 and introduce rc.firewall6.

  H.  I must confess that I see /etc as getting rather cluttered
  these days.  Is there no way to perhaps collapse some of the most
  related functionality into single files and start passing arguments
  or something?  Just a comment..

 At BSDcon Luke M showed me what the NetBSD 1.5 rc files look like.
 They've moved them all to /etc/rc.d/ and made them very granular
 (as SVR4, but w/o leading numbers in the filenames). The NetBSD
 implementation also solved all the issues people have brought up
 in the past -- dependacies, etc...

 We should just move to using their rc code.

One of the reasons for the numbers in the SysVR4 arena is to
set the order of execution so programs which other depend upon
are executed first.  How does the NetBSD solve this problem.

Bill
-- 
Bill Vermillion -   bv @ wjv . com


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-21 Thread Jordan Hubbard

 I wish to update rc.network6 and introduce rc.firewall6.

H.  I must confess that I see /etc as getting rather cluttered
these days.  Is there no way to perhaps collapse some of the most
related functionality into single files and start passing arguments
or something?  Just a comment..

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-21 Thread Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven

-On [20001021 20:10], Jordan Hubbard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 I wish to update rc.network6 and introduce rc.firewall6.

H.  I must confess that I see /etc as getting rather cluttered
these days.  Is there no way to perhaps collapse some of the most
related functionality into single files and start passing arguments
or something?  Just a comment..

The IPv6 systems are so much different in set-up than the IPv4 systems.
Collapsing of the functions is not really doable.

However, Umemoto-san and me will discuss this, since we [he mostly] have
been working on this for the last few months.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven  Network- and systemadministrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]VIA Net.Works The Netherlands
BSD: Technical excellence at its best  http://www.via-net-works.nl
I love to doubt as well as know...


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6

2000-10-21 Thread Jordan Hubbard

 However, Umemoto-san and me will discuss this, since we [he mostly] have
 been working on this for the last few months.

Sounds good to me.  My comments were, just to make it clear again,
just food for thought and not out-and-out objections.  If even 47 more
files in /etc is what it takes to get IPv6 fully supported, then so be
it. :)

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message