On Tuesday 27 January 2009 22:17:17 Aras Vaichas wrote: > Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > On Tuesday 27 January 2009 03:14, Rob Landley wrote: > >> On Thursday 22 January 2009 22:55:23 Aras Vaichas wrote: > >>> One extra note, I do some trickery with /etc/inittab. > >>> > >>> # cat inittab.new > >>> > >>> ::restart:./upgrade_nand > >>> > >>> I change the existing inittab to run my upgrade script, tell init to > >>> reload the new, and then restore the old one so I can continue testing. > >>> > >>> # cp /etc/inittab inittab.bak > >>> # cp inittab.new /etc/inittab > >>> # kill -1 1 > >>> # cp inittab.bak /etc/inittab > >>> > >>> It seems that doing "kill -1 1" from /etc/init/rcS doesn't reload the > >>> inittab. > >> > >> The busybox init is a bit of a hack. > >> > >> I made a largeish stab at cleaning it up during the 1.0.0-pre timeframe, > >> but the source control system was frozen for several months (during the > >> switchover from cvs to svn) so I couldn't check it in, and by the time > >> it was unfrozen I'd had a laptop destroyed and lost the code. Never got > >> back around to redoing it. > >> > >> The current maintainer has chosen instead to implement a different group > >> of init-like programs (sv, runsv, runsvdir and friends, the "runit" > >> package), which can best be described as "not compatible with Ubuntu's > >> upstart". That's what he pays attention to, not the original sysv-like > >> init. > >> > >> So my vague impression is that the init implementation in busybox has > >> largely been ignored for some time now... > > > > No Rob, not really. While I do think that basic idea of init being > > responsible for respawning daemons and stuff wasn't too bright, that does > > not mean I will try to force my views on anyone by neglecting init in > > busybox. > > > > There were some bugs fixed in it. I am not looking away from it. > > > > I did not reply to this thread before because original post is lacking > > details. Look at it: > > Granted, I could again repeat for a zillionth time the request for more > > info, but I was tired. Sorry. > > Oops, perhaps you didn't mean to CC me with your rude reply?
I'm sure he can stop doing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_file > My initial post referred to the script detailed in the link. Did you > follow it? It explains precisely what I was trying to achieve. > > In my follow up posting I explicitely stated: > > It seems that doing "kill -1 1" from /etc/init/rcS doesn't reload the > > inittab. I.E. "I don't know how chroot works, please explain Unix filesystem semantics to me to diagnose a bug that doesn't actually have anything to do with busybox per se." We get that a lot. > Did you see that? Does it not make sense to you? You realize he's the maintainer of the project, and I'm an ex-maintainer of the project, right? > Just because someone else put your nose out of joint doesn't mean you > should take it out on me. That's just unprofessional. Ok, I think you've just exhausted the "volunteer help from open source developers" category. If you want "professional", you're welcome pay one of our consulting rates, and we'll fix your problem as soon as the check clears. (Be careful what you ask for...) Rob _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
