Date: Wed, 20 Sep 1995 19:16:57 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: kelly@fsl.noaa.gov (Sean Kelly) Cc: terry@lambert.org, chuckr@eng.umd.edu, julian@ref.tfs.com, asami@cs.berkeley.edu, ports@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports startup scripts Message-ID: <199509210216.TAA07818@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <9509210011.AA06450@emu.fsl.noaa.gov> from "Sean Kelly" at Sep 20, 95 06:11:13 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >>>>> "Terry" == Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> writes:
>
> Terry> It requires the implementation of run levels.
>
> And it's not clear what run levels are. On the HP/UX system I'm using
> at the moment, there are run levels 0 through 6 and S. S is the only
> one that really makes sense (S == single user), but why is 2 multiuser
> mode? What do you get with levels 0 and 1? What don't you get? And
> sites can customize the higher run levels to mean what they want.
In order:
2 is not multiuser mode; 1 is.
Run level 0 is maintenance mode, run level 1 is multiuser.
You don't get networking (starts at run level 2) or network server
capability (starts at run level 3).
Yes, for 4 + 5, which are not used by default. 6 is typically used for
reboot.
> Terry> I personally *don't* find it objectionable.
>
> All those oddly named scripts, links, codes are hard to grok. More
> often than not, when ``such-n-such is hung,'' I have to
>
> find /etc/rc* -type f | xargs grep such-n-such
>
> just to find out the name of the script I'm supposed to use. And it
> turns out all it did was run ``such-n-such -d'' which I saw with the
> output from `ps', so it would've been faster to just kill it and
> restart it---which I'm leary of since what if I forgot to remove a
> fifo, lock file, or other such debris before doing so?
You are supposed to use an administrative utility, which will call the
appropriate scripts with "start" or "stop" or "stop" then reconfig then
"start". You are an unusal user if you know what hung by command name
rather than by service name.
> I so much prefer just looking through /etc/rc.local (and now,
> /etc/sysconfig) since it collects in one place the needed stuff.
Except that it's not modular enough for daemons that are needed by
various 3rd party programs ("ports" or "packages") and it's not
modular enough for add-on-system components (for instance, load SCO
exection class and Linux execution class on startup by virtue of them
existing without knowing that they existed when you wrote /etc/rc).
Terry Lambert
terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509210216.TAA07818>