Subject: Re: /usr/pkg/etc/rc.d/*
To: Quentin Garnier <email@example.com>
From: Michael G. Schabert <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/16/2003 14:38:35
At 11:42 AM +0100 3/16/03, Quentin Garnier wrote:
>Le Sun, 16 Mar 2003 05:14:22 -0500
>Michael G. Schabert a =E9crit :
>> At 12:23 AM -0500 3/16/03, email@example.com wrote:
>> >On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 03:01:35PM -0800, Greywolf wrote:
>> >> Should /etc/rc.conf by default contain the line:
>> >> . /usr/pkg/etc/rc.conf
>> >> at its end?
>> >> This would roughly complete the root-pkg split.
>> >Is /usr mounted when this would happen?
>> Moot. If /usr is not mounted, then /usr/pkg/bin is unavailable, so it
>> wouldn't matter if /usr/pkg/etc isn't there. In other words, if we
>> did things as they have been suggested (moving the scripts to
>> /etc/rc.d and using /etc/rc.conf), and /usr were unmounted when rc
>> was running, no packages would be started since the binaries aren't
>> there. The scripts are only as good as the binaries that they're
>rc.d scripts must be in /etc because at the time of rcorder, /usr is not
>mounted (unless a trivial case). Given the dependancies though, /usr is
>mounted when the time comes for those package to run (they will typically
>depend on DAEMON).
>The hack suggested by Greywolf would work (rc.conf is reread by each
>script) but the problem of rcorder will remain, unless we add a rc.d
>script named 'pkg' that will rcorder scripts in /usr/pkg/etc/rc.d. This
>has the drawback of not letting the user precisely define globally the
>order of scripts.
This is somewhat putting the cart before the horse except in special
circumstances*. There are basically two camps in this proposal.
1) anything in /usr/pkg/etc/rc.d/ should be copied to /etc/rc.d/
2) There should be /usr/pkg/etc/rc.conf which controls scripts that
reside in /usr/pkg/etc/rc.d/.
But /usr must be mounted for any action to be taken regardlerss of
the approach, since the action taken still requires /usr/pkg/bin to
Copy/move rc.d files to /etc. Now the files can be read before /usr
is mounted. However, the binaries that are called in the files are
still unavailable until after /usr is mounted. So you must take care
to construct the REQUIRES so that rcorder doesn't execute the script
until after /usr is mounted.
Rc doesn't even know about the scripts until after /usr is mounted.
=46ine, since nothing could be done anyway.
You're advocating approach 1, as that will still let rcorder
determine precise order. With approach 2, you would essentially have
an rcorder for the base distribution and an rcorder for packages, to
be run later. I don't really see that as the drawback that you do,
since the users who actually wish to "precisely define globally the
order of scripts" are in no way impeded from still using approach
1...they'll just have an empty /usr/pkg/etc/rc.conf. They aren't
encumbered by doing anything more than they would be otherwise, but
as a whole, the system will be much more elegant. As it is, we have
rc.conf, rc.lkm, and rc.local. If you don't want to use
/usr/pkg/etc/rc.conf, then adding an /etc/rc.pkg would (1) still
"feel right", (2) keep the same interface. This rc.pkg would be like
rc.conf in that it would be looking for foo=3DYES as opposed to the
rc.local looking for the actual commands or script names. It would
still not allow its options to be rcordered until after /usr is
mounted, since that is where the rc.d files with the order info would
Just my thoughts,
* Packages are installed (by default) in /usr/pkg/ except those for
X11 and certain special cases like standalone-tcsh. X11 binaries
should not be called by rc, but rather by xdm, xinit, etc. The
special cases that install outside /usr could easily also simply use
the "regular" /etc/rc.conf and /etc/rc.d/.
Bikers don't *DO* taglines.