Re: /etc/rc.d/rc.subr; prefix ${pexp} with script interpretor path
As the others here with brains have had a chance to sleep on this, what's the current thinking? As I understand it, there are 2 decisions to make: 1) How to decide if a $daemon is a script as opposed to a binary (*) file(1) (*) dd(d) (*) sed(1) Could stat(1) be tasked to switch case on file attributes (e.g: size)? 2) Whether to check if a script's interpreter is valid http://openbsd.7691.n7.nabble.com/etc-rc-d-rc-subr-prefix-pexp-with-script-interpretor-path-td234439.html Yes/No/Other? -- Craig Skinner | http://twitter.com/Craig_Skinner | http://linkd.in/yGqkv7
Re: /etc/rc.d/rc.subr; prefix ${pexp} with script interpretor path
On 2013/09/21 13:12, Craig R. Skinner wrote: As the others here with brains have had a chance to sleep on this, what's the current thinking? As I understand it, there are 2 decisions to make: 1) How to decide if a $daemon is a script as opposed to a binary (*) file(1) too big, too complex. file(1) has to parse a 500K /etc/magic each time it runs, which would be 15+ times for this, and uses about 8MB ram. definitely overkill for identifying the contents of the first two characters of a file. remember this has to run on a wide range of platforms. (*) dd(d) (*) sed(1) Could stat(1) be tasked to switch case on file attributes (e.g: size)? how would size help? 2) Whether to check if a script's interpreter is valid http://openbsd.7691.n7.nabble.com/etc-rc-d-rc-subr-prefix-pexp-with-script-interpretor-path-td234439.html Yes/No/Other? -- Craig Skinner | http://twitter.com/Craig_Skinner | http://linkd.in/yGqkv7 How much does this really help anyway? Porters still need to check the actual string used (for example, it's quite common for perl things to use perl: programnanme), and it doesn't take much extra typing to add a pexp line to the script in cases where it's needed. I am rather wary of adding complication to rc.subr, iirc one of the conditions when the subsystem was first added was that it remained simple..
Re: /etc/rc.d/rc.subr; prefix ${pexp} with script interpretor path
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 14:37:21 +0100 From: Stuart Henderson st...@openbsd.org How much does this really help anyway? Porters still need to check the actual string used (for example, it's quite common for perl things to use perl: programnanme), and it doesn't take much extra typing to add a pexp line to the script in cases where it's needed. I am rather wary of adding complication to rc.subr, iirc one of the conditions when the subsystem was first added was that it remained simple.. +1
Re: SQLite 3.8.0.2 diff
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:10PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 02:35:02PM -0400, James Turner wrote: Attached is a diff to update our in tree version of SQLite to the recently released 3.8.0.2. SQLite 3.8.0 is needed for a fossil update I'm working on. I've tested this diff against my fossil update and everything appears to be good, the recent arc4random addition should have been maintained across the diff. This should probably go through a round of bulk builds. I'll express my thanks now for anyone who can assist by running a bulk build on a couple platforms. I'm also okay with this. SQLite 3.8.0.2 has been imported. -- James Turner
