From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 12 11:02:37 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 804F016A425 for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:02:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06AA243D8A for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:02:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (peter@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jBCB2QDT064746 for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:02:26 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Received: (from peter@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id jBCB2OqA064740 for freebsd-rc@freebsd.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:02:24 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:02:24 GMT Message-Id: <200512121102.jBCB2OqA064740@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: peter set sender to owner-bugmaster@freebsd.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Current problem reports assigned to you X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:02:37 -0000 Current FreeBSD problem reports Critical problems Serious problems S Submitted Tracker Resp. Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o [2005/02/10] conf/77340 rc awk used in /etc/rc.d/nsswitch when not a 1 problem total. Non-critical problems S Submitted Tracker Resp. Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o [2004/06/30] conf/68525 rc Loader's verbose boot mode has rc.d/local o [2004/11/11] conf/73834 rc Bad dependencies for /etc/rc.d/savecore o [2004/11/13] conf/73909 rc [patch] rc.d/sshd does not work with port o [2005/02/18] conf/77663 rc Suggestion: add /etc/rc.d/addnetswap afte o [2005/05/14] kern/81006 rc ipnat not working with tunnel interfaces o [2005/08/27] conf/85363 rc syntax error in /etc/rc.d/devfs o [2005/11/02] conf/88383 rc [PATCH]: etc/rc.d/ldconfig:does not prope o [2005/11/14] conf/88974 rc autoconfigured vlans confuse rc.d/netif 8 problems total. From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 16 22:13:38 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A2A516A41F for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 22:13:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mail2.fluidhosting.com [204.14.90.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9923843D6D for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2005 22:13:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 20135 invoked by uid 399); 16 Dec 2005 22:13:36 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.3?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 16 Dec 2005 22:13:36 -0000 Message-ID: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 14:13:34 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, simon@FreeBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 22:13:38 -0000 Howdy, Because it was previously not possible to run scripts for ports in the base rcorder, and because the rc.d/ike script needed to run well before localpkg, it was imported into the base, and lives currently in /etc/rc.d. However, now that I am about to MFC the code that runs ports scripts in the base rcorder, I'm wondering if we shouldn't add the rc.d script to the port, and remove it from HEAD and RELENG_6 after my MFC. I would of course be glad to assist with any details related to the move. Any thoughts? Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 00:04:21 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B64A16A41F; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:04:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from simon@zaphod.nitro.dk) Received: from zaphod.nitro.dk (zarniwoop.nitro.dk [83.92.207.38]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7314543D58; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:04:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from simon@zaphod.nitro.dk) Received: by zaphod.nitro.dk (Postfix, from userid 3000) id 85293114AF; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:04:19 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:04:19 +0100 From: "Simon L. Nielsen" To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:04:21 -0000 --kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2005.12.16 14:13:34 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > Because it was previously not possible to run scripts for ports in the ba= se=20 > rcorder, and because the rc.d/ike script needed to run well before=20 > localpkg, it was imported into the base, and lives currently in /etc/rc.d= =2E=20 > However, now that I am about to MFC the code that runs ports scripts in t= he=20 > base rcorder, I'm wondering if we shouldn't add the rc.d script to the=20 > port, and remove it from HEAD and RELENG_6 after my MFC. I would of cours= e=20 > be glad to assist with any details related to the move. Hey, Sound like a good idea. I actually hadn't noticed that the ike script had been updated to point at isakmpd, last I checked it looked like the ike script was just a leftover from the NetBSD import. I also thought I had committed the isakmpd rc.d script that I did for $REALJOB a while ago (based on the rc.d/ike script) to the port, but it looks like I forgot to do that. I will try to get the port updated to include an rc.d script this weekend, but no guarantees that I will get to it - Christmas is coming way to fast with all the required shopping ;-). With regard to the magic keywords (mainly REQUIRE/DEBFORE) I assume the ones currently in src/etc/rc.d/ike should be OK? --=20 Simon L. Nielsen --kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDo1YCh9pcDSc1mlERAtavAJ9+lAuyzszV1im2JZ/RgIgFaed8bACgto8Y M5avqdn2dnHRKmOqcGbZSMs= =TDbv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj-- From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 00:45:29 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C35A16A41F for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:45:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mail2.fluidhosting.com [204.14.90.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4401143D5E for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:45:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 61752 invoked by uid 399); 17 Dec 2005 00:45:26 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.3?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 00:45:26 -0000 Message-ID: <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 16:45:25 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Simon L. Nielsen" References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> In-Reply-To: <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:45:29 -0000 Simon L. Nielsen wrote: > On 2005.12.16 14:13:34 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > >> Because it was previously not possible to run scripts for ports in the base >> rcorder, and because the rc.d/ike script needed to run well before >> localpkg, it was imported into the base, and lives currently in /etc/rc.d. >> However, now that I am about to MFC the code that runs ports scripts in the >> base rcorder, I'm wondering if we shouldn't add the rc.d script to the >> port, and remove it from HEAD and RELENG_6 after my MFC. I would of course >> be glad to assist with any details related to the move. > > Hey, > > Sound like a good idea. I actually hadn't noticed that the ike script > had been updated to point at isakmpd, last I checked it looked like > the ike script was just a leftover from the NetBSD import. Interesting! In that case, I lean much more strongly toward removing it, possible even in RELENG_5. > I also thought I had committed the isakmpd rc.d script that I did for > $REALJOB a while ago (based on the rc.d/ike script) to the port, but > it looks like I forgot to do that. Ok, sounds like you're on top of this then. The preferred way to do this currently would be to add the script to the files directory, and the following to the port Makefile: USE_RC_SUBR= ike.sh There is already some cool stuff in the ports infrastructure to handle these scripts. Take a look at databases/mysql323-server if you want an example. The current infrastructure already handles things like subbing out PREFIX, etc. for you. In the near future the ports infrastructure will be updated to then install that file as just ike on systems that are past the MFC date of the local_startup changes, and as ike.sh on older systems so it will still work. > I will try to get the port updated to include an rc.d script this > weekend, but no guarantees that I will get to it - Christmas is coming > way to fast with all the required shopping ;-). *sigh* tell me about it. There is no particular hurry to this, but if you would please drop me a note when you make this update (just in case I miss it) I would appreciate it. Ideally, if we delete the script from /etc/rc.d (which is how I'm leaning), then I'd like to have time to do that so that it can be MFC'ed before the RELENG_[56] freezes in 6 weeks. > With regard to the magic keywords (mainly REQUIRE/BEFORE) I assume > the ones currently in src/etc/rc.d/ike should be OK? Well, if you use the ones that are there now, it will at least be no worse than it is now. :) I don't know enough about this to be sure exactly what the right thing to do is in regards to ordering. As for the other magic words, you have to have PROVIDE in there, or rc.d won't recognize it, and if this script isn't eligible for running in a jail, then the 'nojail' KEYWORD should stay as well. hth, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 01:31:07 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 389DF16A420 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:31:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: from relay.rdsnet.ro (gimli.rdsnet.ro [193.231.236.70]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D1A0643D5C for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:31:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: (qmail 24450 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2005 01:31:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.rdsnet.ro) (62.231.74.130) by smtp1-133.rdsnet.ro with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 01:31:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 25115 invoked by uid 89); 17 Dec 2005 01:10:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO it.buh.tecnik93.com) (81.196.204.98) by 0 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 01:10:40 -0000 Received: from it.buh.tecnik93.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by it.buh.tecnik93.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA497B80C; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 03:10:25 +0200 (EET) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 03:10:24 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20051217031024.60912c94@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.100 (GTK+ 2.8.8; i386-portbld-freebsd6.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, "Simon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:31:07 -0000 On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 16:45:25 -0800 Doug Barton wrote: > Simon L. Nielsen wrote: > > On 2005.12.16 14:13:34 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > > > >> Because it was previously not possible to run scripts for ports in > >> the base rcorder, and because the rc.d/ike script needed to run > >> well before localpkg, it was imported into the base, and lives > >> currently in /etc/rc.d. However, now that I am about to MFC the > >> code that runs ports scripts in the base rcorder, I'm wondering if > >> we shouldn't add the rc.d script to the port, and remove it from > >> HEAD and RELENG_6 after my MFC. I would of course be glad to assist > >> with any details related to the move. [ ... ] > Ok, sounds like you're on top of this then. The preferred way to do > this currently would be to add the script to the files directory, and > the following to the port Makefile: > > USE_RC_SUBR= ike.sh > > There is already some cool stuff in the ports infrastructure to > handle these scripts. Take a look at databases/mysql323-server if you > want an example. The current infrastructure already handles things > like subbing out PREFIX, etc. for you. In the near future the ports > infrastructure will be updated to then install that file as just ike > on systems that are past the MFC date of the local_startup changes, > and as ike.sh on older systems so it will still work. Better use: USE_RC_SUBR= ike and put the script in files/ike.in Currently this will perform some substitutions on the script (PREFEIX, etc.) and install it as ike.sh After pav@'s PR gets commited it will install w/o .sh on rc.d sistems (HEAD for now), which is, AFAIK what we want in the long run (so we can differentiate between (non-)sourced scipts based on extension. -- IOnut - Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" BOFH excuse #150: Arcserve crashed the server again From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 01:39:31 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E65B816A41F for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:39:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mail2.fluidhosting.com [204.14.90.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1ED4043D5F for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:39:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 12921 invoked by uid 399); 17 Dec 2005 01:39:30 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.3?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 01:39:30 -0000 Message-ID: <43A36C4F.4010005@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:39:27 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> <20051217031024.60912c94@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <20051217031024.60912c94@it.buh.tecnik93.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, "Simon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:39:34 -0000 Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > Better use: > USE_RC_SUBR= ike > and put the script in files/ike.in > > Currently this will perform some substitutions on the script (PREFEIX, > etc.) and install it as ike.sh Thanks for that, I wasn't aware that a .in vs. .sh.in was already working :) Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 01:43:16 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF01116A41F for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:43:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: from relay.rdsnet.ro (gimli.rdsnet.ro [193.231.236.70]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8073443D66 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:43:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: (qmail 28033 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2005 01:43:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.rdsnet.ro) (62.231.74.130) by smtp1-133.rdsnet.ro with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 01:43:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 18819 invoked by uid 89); 17 Dec 2005 01:43:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO it.buh.tecnik93.com) (81.196.204.98) by 0 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 01:43:09 -0000 Received: from it.buh.tecnik93.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by it.buh.tecnik93.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2135FB80C; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 03:43:06 +0200 (EET) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 03:43:04 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20051217034304.5ed69ef1@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <43A36C4F.4010005@FreeBSD.org> References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> <20051217031024.60912c94@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36C4F.4010005@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.100 (GTK+ 2.8.8; i386-portbld-freebsd6.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, "Simon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:43:17 -0000 On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:39:27 -0800 Doug Barton wrote: > Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > > > Better use: > > USE_RC_SUBR= ike > > and put the script in files/ike.in > > > > Currently this will perform some substitutions on the script > > (PREFEIX, etc.) and install it as ike.sh > > Thanks for that, I wasn't aware that a .in vs. .sh.in was already > working :) Now: USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name.sh Then: USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name Is this not what we want ? -- IOnut - Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" Party-bug in the Aloha protocol From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 01:51:25 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0490416A420 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:51:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mail2.fluidhosting.com [204.14.90.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E0E9143D53 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:51:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 24943 invoked by uid 399); 17 Dec 2005 01:51:18 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.3?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 01:51:18 -0000 Message-ID: <43A36F14.1050804@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:51:16 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> <20051217031024.60912c94@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36C4F.4010005@FreeBSD.org> <20051217034304.5ed69ef1@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <20051217034304.5ed69ef1@it.buh.tecnik93.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, "Simon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:51:25 -0000 Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:39:27 -0800 > Doug Barton wrote: > >> Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: >> >>> Better use: >>> USE_RC_SUBR= ike >>> and put the script in files/ike.in >>> >>> Currently this will perform some substitutions on the script >>> (PREFEIX, etc.) and install it as ike.sh >> Thanks for that, I wasn't aware that a .in vs. .sh.in was already >> working :) > > Now: > USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh > USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name.sh > Then: > USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh > USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name > > Is this not what we want ? For the Now part, yes. For the Then part, the important factor is whether the system is past the local_startup MFC or not. If not, then we always want to install as name.sh, otherwise the script won't run. If so, then we want to install as just name. There is also the factor of how to deal with a port that has a legitimate need to install as name.sh in the post MFC world, which would mean (after all the ports are fixed) that its boot script gets sourced into the rc environment, rather than run in a subshell. I'd organize Then like this: Pre-MFC system: USE_RC_SUBR= * --> name.sh Post-MFC system: USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name (this will be the common case) USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh Make sense? Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 02:04:07 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C283F16A41F for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:04:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: from relay.rdsnet.ro (gimli.rdsnet.ro [193.231.236.70]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B47A643D66 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:04:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from itetcu@people.tecnik93.com) Received: (qmail 662 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2005 02:04:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.rdsnet.ro) (62.231.74.130) by smtp1-133.rdsnet.ro with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 02:04:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 22131 invoked by uid 89); 17 Dec 2005 02:03:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO it.buh.tecnik93.com) (81.196.204.98) by 0 with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 02:03:57 -0000 Received: from it.buh.tecnik93.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by it.buh.tecnik93.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AADF4B80C; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 04:03:49 +0200 (EET) Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 04:03:48 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20051217040348.087f1248@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <43A36F14.1050804@FreeBSD.org> References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> <20051217031024.60912c94@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36C4F.4010005@FreeBSD.org> <20051217034304.5ed69ef1@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36F14.1050804@FreeBSD.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.100 (GTK+ 2.8.8; i386-portbld-freebsd6.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, "Simon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:04:07 -0000 On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:51:16 -0800 Doug Barton wrote: > Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:39:27 -0800 > > Doug Barton wrote: > > > >> Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > >> > >>> Better use: > >>> USE_RC_SUBR= ike > >>> and put the script in files/ike.in > >>> > >>> Currently this will perform some substitutions on the script > >>> (PREFEIX, etc.) and install it as ike.sh > >> Thanks for that, I wasn't aware that a .in vs. .sh.in was already > >> working :) > > > > Now: > > USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh > > USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name.sh > > Then: > > USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh > > USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name > > > > Is this not what we want ? > > For the Now part, yes. For the Then part, the important factor is > whether the system is past the local_startup MFC or not. If not, then > we always want to install as name.sh, otherwise the script won't run. > If so, then we want to install as just name. There is also the factor > of how to deal with a port that has a legitimate need to install as > name.sh in the post MFC world, which would mean (after all the ports > are fixed) that its boot script gets sourced into the rc environment, > rather than run in a subshell. I'd organize Then like this: > > Pre-MFC system: > USE_RC_SUBR= * --> name.sh > Post-MFC system: > USE_RC_SUBR= name.in --> name (this will be the common case) > USE_RC_SUBR= name.sh.in --> name.sh > > Make sense? Yes, that's what I (wanted to) say. ("my" then = post-MFC, post-fix_ports). Pav's PR will get us support for this in bsd.port.mk, the rest is fixing the ports to be rc.d compatible and repo-copies. -- IOnut - Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" Mail server hit by UniSpammer From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 02:21:17 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A2C316A41F for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:21:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mail2.fluidhosting.com [204.14.90.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 19B1643D62 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:21:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 48763 invoked by uid 399); 17 Dec 2005 02:21:13 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.3?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 02:21:12 -0000 Message-ID: <43A37617.2030406@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 18:21:11 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> <20051217031024.60912c94@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36C4F.4010005@FreeBSD.org> <20051217034304.5ed69ef1@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36F14.1050804@FreeBSD.org> <20051217040348.087f1248@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <20051217040348.087f1248@it.buh.tecnik93.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, "Simon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:21:17 -0000 Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > Yes, that's what I (wanted to) say. ("my" then = post-MFC, post-fix_ports). > Pav's PR will get us support for this in bsd.port.mk, the rest is > fixing the ports to be rc.d compatible and repo-copies. That's great, although ironically I _just_ ran into a situation where that is not the ideal way to do it. :) I am working on updating misc/compat5x to use an rc.d-style script, and tried doing it the way that you suggested, with compat5x.in. When bsd.port.mk tried to create the boot script however, I got an error because work/compat5x already existed, it was the directory in work where the tarball unpacked itself. Most of the time this is not going to be a problem, as the source directory will be versioned (like foopkg-1.2.3), but this is a corner case that should be kept in mind. For now I'm going to suggest using compat5x.sh for this particular case, it can be adjusted down the road if needed. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection