Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:38:28 -0400 From: "Andresen, Jason R." <jandrese@mitre.org> To: "JoaoBR" <joao@matik.com.br>, <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Cc: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> Subject: RE: I like my rc.d boot messages :( Message-ID: <53B52415C756A84E8A169F0E3673A329011E9D9A@IMCSRV6.MITRE.ORG> In-Reply-To: <200807251402.00871.joao@matik.com.br> References: <200807231846.33728.jhb@freebsd.org><200807241448.30627.joao@matik.com.br> <4888D859.3090809@quip.cz> <200807251402.00871.joao@matik.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 24 July 2008 16:30:33 Miroslav Lachman wrote: >> JoaoBR wrote: >> >> [...] >> >> >>>>I'd go further: it was nice when startup scripts printed their >name >> >>>>(no newline) and then '.\n' when they were finished. It then >becomes >> >>>>unambiguous who is at fault. It's hard to tell with the current >> >>>>non-system which of the 2 scrpts (the one that has printed it's >name, >> >>>>or the one that next prints it's name) is at fault. Worse.. it >could >> >>>>be the quiet script in between. >> >>> >> >>>Agreed, but you could delineate it with something other than '\n" >too. >> >>>Like '[amd] [smtp] [dhcpd] ...', with the ']' meaning the script is >> >>>done and has moved on to the next service. >> >> >> >>I like that. [ means processing has started, name is the >service/script >> >>runnging, ] means processing of that script has completed. All the >info >> >>you need for multiple services, all on one line. >> > >> > simply another wiered outcome - not understandable btw same as this >> > mystical dot thing >> > >> > something more obvious would be: >> > >> > starting $service_name ... up >> > starting $service_name ... up >> > ... >> > >> > that would be something clear, specially for whom did not invented >it >> >> It seems too verbose. (does anybody expect "stoping" service on system >> boot?) And each service on separate line seems to me like vaste of >space. >> Line like "[ssh] [smtp] [dhcpd] [mysql]" is enough for me. >> It is easy to document it in handbook and man pages. >> >> Just my 0.02 >> > >well, the obvious often is'nt :) > for me it would be something like: > > starting $service_name ... up > starting $service_name ... failed > starting $service_name ... up > Personally, I'd like a mix between your above suggestion and the current method: Starting Services: sshd...ok, httpd...ok, ftpd...failed
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?53B52415C756A84E8A169F0E3673A329011E9D9A>