Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

An implementation of rc.d boot scripts for FreeBSD

Expand Messages
  • Mike Makonnen
    Glad to here (from Doug) that you guys aren t dead :) Please check out http://home.pacbell.net/makonnen/rcng.html for an implementation of rc.d boot scripts
    Message 1 of 4 , May 6, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Glad to here (from Doug) that you guys aren't dead :)

      Please check out http://home.pacbell.net/makonnen/rcng.html for an
      implementation of rc.d boot scripts for FreeBSD. It's pretty much
      "feature compete." I have taken care to integrate it seamlessly into a
      -current build so don't be shy and try it out :). It doesn't do anything
      until you define rc_ng="YES" in /etc/rc.conf, and even then it should be
      fairly smooth sailing.

      What it needs the most right now is testing, testing, and more testing.
      Looking forward to your comments/questions.


      Cheers,
      Mike Makonnen
    • Luke Mewburn
      ... Hi Mike. I haven t got a FreeBSD box running to test on, so my comments are based on observation only. A few comments: + Could you change the URL to the
      Message 2 of 4 , May 6, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 01:18:42AM -0600, Mike Makonnen wrote:
        | Please check out http://home.pacbell.net/makonnen/rcng.html for an
        | implementation of rc.d boot scripts for FreeBSD. It's pretty much
        | "feature compete." I have taken care to integrate it seamlessly into a
        | -current build so don't be shy and try it out :). It doesn't do anything
        | until you define rc_ng="YES" in /etc/rc.conf, and even then it should be
        | fairly smooth sailing.
        |
        | What it needs the most right now is testing, testing, and more testing.
        | Looking forward to your comments/questions.

        Hi Mike.

        I haven't got a FreeBSD box running to test on, so my comments are
        based on observation only.

        A few comments:

        + Could you change the URL to the rc.d PDF to its canonical location of:
        http://www.mewburn.net/luke/papers/rc.d.pdf
        ? thanks.

        + I *strongly* recommend ensuring that you're using the latest rc.subr
        and rc.d/* scripts in NetBSD-current as your reference.
        For example, I notice that FreeBSD's /etc/rc.subr appears to be
        NetBSD rev 1.28, but we're up to 1.48 in NetBSD.
        I've made a few important changes since the revision you're using,
        and it would make sense to track those changes.

        + I'm curious as to what the 'FreeBSD' and 'NetBSD' KEYWORDS in the
        rc.d scripts are for. Is it to allow easy differentiation of "what
        came from where" ?


        I'd like to see this work in FreeBSD; more code sharing and less
        gratuitious Not Invented Here-ism is good for both projects
        (and my ego WRT rc.d :)

        Cheers,
        Luke.

        --
        Luke Mewburn <lukem@...> http://www.wasabisystems.com
        Luke Mewburn <lukem@...> http://www.netbsd.org
        Wasabi Systems - NetBSD hackers for hire
        NetBSD - the world's most portable UNIX-like operating system
      • Gordon Tetlow
        ... There are some scripts that are only applicable to NetBSD and some scripts that are only applicable FreeBSD. On boot, we only run the scripts that are
        Message 3 of 4 , May 6, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          On Mon, 6 May 2002, Luke Mewburn wrote:

          > + I'm curious as to what the 'FreeBSD' and 'NetBSD' KEYWORDS in the
          > rc.d scripts are for. Is it to allow easy differentiation of "what
          > came from where" ?

          There are some scripts that are only applicable to NetBSD and some scripts
          that are only applicable FreeBSD. On boot, we only run the scripts that
          are applicable to FreeBSD (ie, those containing the FreeBSD keyword).

          It's just an easy way to disregard scripts that are applicable to one
          project and not the other.

          -gordon
        • Mike Makonnen
          ... Done. ... I wanted to do that all in one go after I had the whole system up and running. It s on my list of things to do over the next couple of weeks. ...
          Message 4 of 4 , May 6, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            On Mon, 2002-05-06 at 01:59, Luke Mewburn wrote:
            >
            > + Could you change the URL to the rc.d PDF to its canonical location of:
            > http://www.mewburn.net/luke/papers/rc.d.pdf
            > ? thanks.

            Done.

            >
            > + I *strongly* recommend ensuring that you're using the latest rc.subr
            > and rc.d/* scripts in NetBSD-current as your reference.
            > For example, I notice that FreeBSD's /etc/rc.subr appears to be
            > NetBSD rev 1.28, but we're up to 1.48 in NetBSD.
            > I've made a few important changes since the revision you're using,
            > and it would make sense to track those changes.
            >

            I wanted to do that all in one go after I had the whole system up and
            running. It's on my list of things to do over the next couple of weeks.

            > + I'm curious as to what the 'FreeBSD' and 'NetBSD' KEYWORDS in the
            > rc.d scripts are for. Is it to allow easy differentiation of "what
            > came from where" ?

            They denote which operating systems the script can run on.

            David O'Brien was insistent that the same script run on both NetBSD and
            FreeBSD. The problem is that there's a lot of differences, some are
            policy issues and some are concrete differences in architecture. So far
            I have taken care of those differences with 'case' statements. My hope
            is that once this makes it into FreeBSD, a few people from both projects
            can come together and settle some of the differences.


            >
            > I'd like to see this work in FreeBSD; more code sharing and less
            > gratuitious Not Invented Here-ism is good for both projects

            Unfortunately there's too many 'case' statements for my tastes, but it
            was necessary. But I'm hoping I can get rid of them in the near future.
            If I had tried to get a consensus, on the differences, from both
            projects from the beginning it would have been bikeshed'ed to death
            before it got off the ground. So I decided the 'case' statements were a
            necessary evil for now.


            Cheers,
            Mike Makonnen
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.