Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 20:58:49 +0200 From: "[LoN]Kamikaze" <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: databases/postgresql81-server - dangerous init script Message-ID: <44298769.1020405@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <20060328184452.GB16561@odin.ac.hmc.edu> References: <442981B8.4010605@gmx.de> <20060328184452.GB16561@odin.ac.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brooks Davis wrote: > On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 08:34:32PM +0200, [LoN]Kamikaze wrote: >> The rc.d script for this port contains a new style script, but follows >> the old naming conventions, which will cause it to be executed directly >> sourced into the boot shell, which is an unnecessary risk, since it >> means that booting will fail if the script exits. > > Actually, in this case, the manpage is wrong. Only scripts in /etc/rc.d > that end in .sh not all scripts ending in .sh are sourced. That said, > ports should be fixed to install without the .sh suffix so we can eventually > remove the special case (should there be any point.) > > -- Brooks > Well, that's what you get when you trust a manpage (somehow that makes me remember the UNIX Haters Handbook). That leads to the question what sourcing a script into the boot shell gains us that makes it worth the risk? Triggering it by a naming convention also looks like a leftover from the old system. Doing this with a KEYWORD would seem more consistent to me and increase the probability that the script author knew what he was doing.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44298769.1020405>