From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 20 17:15:04 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC7E8106567E for ; Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:15:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rnoland@2hip.net) Received: from gizmo.2hip.net (gizmo.2hip.net [64.74.207.195]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7F048FC12 for ; Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:15:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rnoland@2hip.net) Received: from [192.168.1.151] (adsl-19-213-9.bna.bellsouth.net [68.19.213.9]) (authenticated bits=0) by gizmo.2hip.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m6KHEw3v044124 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:14:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rnoland@2hip.net) From: Robert Noland To: Peter Ross In-Reply-To: <20080720022644.H23554@oldie.bigpond.com> References: <20080720022644.H23554@oldie.bigpond.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-cdChWYDJYrWM8QnZlQ6F" Organization: 2Hip Networks Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:14:52 -0400 Message-Id: <1216574092.1887.1.camel@wombat.2hip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.8 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on gizmo.2hip.net Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rc improvements (wanted?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:15:05 -0000 --=-cdChWYDJYrWM8QnZlQ6F Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 02:32 +1000, Peter Ross wrote: > [Resending - maybe I used the wrong mail address which is not subscribed=20 > to -current? Does it matter? Anyway, the message did not make it to the=20 > list, it seems, and I did not get a notice.. strange] > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:07:32 +1000 (EST) >=20 > On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, Robert Noland wrote: >=20 > > On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 22:19 -0700, Doug Barton wrote: > > > Bernd Walter wrote: > > > > Speaking about small systems, where startup time is more a problem = than > > > > on 08/15 desktop and server systems. > > > > What I would love to see is that scripts like moused, ypserv, lpt, = etc > > > > are not started if the services are disabled. > > >=20 > > > That wold be a neat trick, how do you propose we accomplish it? (no,=20 > > > I'm not being snide.) > > > ..=20 > > > One way you could do this is to have /etc/rc.d/active and=20 > > > /etc/rc.d/inactive (and probably an /etc/rc.d/system for critical=20 > > > stuff that most people shouldn't touch). Then you could have a=20 > > > vipw-like system to allow users to edit rc.conf that would move the=20 > > > scripts to the right directory. Of course, this would be fraught with= =20 > > > potential for problems. :) > >=20 > > I almost hate to toss this out there, but what about a sys v type rc? >=20 > Usually the scripts are running run_rc_command. >=20 > This does a checkyesno for the rcvar variable which is usually=20 > ${name}_enable. In most of the cases it uses set_rcvar to achieve this. >=20 > If so, /etc/rc could evaluate ${name}_enable (it already knows them via=20 > /etc/rc.conf) before actually calling a script. >=20 > There are some irregular names amongst the name of the rcvar variable. Actually, gnome comes to mind... The gnome_enable option, starts all of the relevant components of which there are a few... robert. > I am not 100% sure whether same of the scripts set ${name}_enable vaiable= s=20 > implicitly. That could complicate things. I could not find evidence by=20 > browsing through them. >=20 > I also do not know whether there are scripts that actually do something=20 > valuable before calling run_rc_command. >=20 > At the moment it looks to me that these excemptions could be dealt with b= y=20 > adapting the scripts so they meet the standard (running only when=20 > ${name}_enable is set). >=20 > I only looked through some of the /etc/rc.d scripts en detail (+ some=20 > greps for rcvar etc. in the directory) so it needs some more=20 > investigation. >=20 > If it works it avoids messing around with symlinks or moving scripts=20 > around, and it reduces the scripts that actually run. >=20 > As a sys admin I really like the BSD way of having everything relevant to= =20 > my system in one /etc/rc.conf. It is very convenient. >=20 > Regards > Peter > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " --=-cdChWYDJYrWM8QnZlQ6F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAkiDcowACgkQM4TrQ4qfRONsfwCfRqPh1qlJKr1jXoSL1v1EDR9o xSMAnjLB4qM6/zGxG4qAiqhEu8YqGoTE =HZGE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-cdChWYDJYrWM8QnZlQ6F--