Naram Qashat wrote:
In the pkgtools.conf file that portupgrade installs, there's two
sections, BEFOREINSTALL and AFTERINSTALL. In BEFOREINSTALL, you could
put the following in to make it try to stop the service if there's an rc
script for the port:
'*' => proc { |origin| cmd_stop_rc(origin) }
And almost the same thing for AFTERINSTALL, except cmd_start_rc instead
of cmd_stop_rc. And as long as the line for that service is in
/etc/rc.conf, it'll start or stop via the rc script. It even says that
in the comments of pkgtools.conf.
Ah, you misunderstood me. I was never saying, or meaning, that ports
could not do it, I was saying they did not do it, no one I have seen
implemented that behavior. Yes, you're certainly right, they can,
they've had the ability all along.
Naram Qashat
Chuck Robey wrote:
Naram Qashat wrote:
Also a good thing to point out is that portupgrade can be configured
to automatically start or stop a port's daemon via it's
/usr/local/etc/rc.d script, which still relies on having the
appropriate line in /etc/rc.conf to tell the rc.d script to run, but
it is helpful for upgrading ports which have daemons so they can be
shut down and then started again after the upgrade is complete.
Not sure I understand what you mean here. I *think* I remember that
ports (quoite a while back) did not require any patching of rc.conf at
all, just coding in /usr/local/etc/rc.d. Nowadays, there are required
lines in rc.conf which fire sections of rc.d, but apparently (and i do
approve of this) the /etc/rc.conf can't be touched. I guess I don't
understand why not have the entire startup code in rc.d, and merely
have rc source in rc.d after it's finished with rc.conf.
I just took a good long look at portupgrade, I didn't see any option
like you're talking about. You understand, there is no reason that
ports couldn't do what I'm asking about. They aren't written to do
this (at least, several different daemon-ports that I've installed
all required manual patching of rc.conf). This isn't just my own
interpretation, because the ports themselves hint to the user that
they should patch rc.conf to get the port working as a daemon.
I'm just saying that ports should be written to handle this
themselves, and not to require manual patching to get this done. One
reason would be users (non-technical ones) who install a particular
port as a dependency, and thus never even see the comments about what
they should do to get things working. I can't see any reason NOT to
do this, and good reason why it should be done.
Naram Qashat
Chuck Robey wrote:
I was wondering why ports apparently aren't allowed an obvious
freedom, that of being able to set themselves to run as daemons. A
greate long time past, I seem to remember that there used to be a
file /usr/local/etc/rc.local, which (if it existed) would be
automatically sourced in at the end of rc.conf. Ports which built
daemons were allowed (well, actually, expected) to ask the user if
they wished to activate the port, and if so, the port would add a
line of the form 'portname_enable="YES"', and this would make your
new port operate. Well, it seems from what I see of my new system,
that this is no longer the case. I could understand (and approve
of) ports not being allowed to modify any /etc/contents, but howcome
ports can't use this rather obvious workaround?
I'm pretty sure this used to be allowed... and it seems like a good
policy to me, from the number of non-technical folks who now run
FreeBSD. I just wanted to know why its not anymore.
__
_____________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"