Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

[Daniel C. Sobral]

David Scheidt wrote:
> 
> What's wrong with run with system V runlevels?  Other than it's system V and
> everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course.

They try to map graphs into a line.

--
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
who is as social as a wampas

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Jos Backus]

On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 12:07:49AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> I would prefer if the lines could be added to /etc/ttys somewhat
> like:
>   sshd "/usr/local/sbin/sshd" none ondemand
> 
> And then we could
>   telinit -on sshd
>   telinit -off sshd

hal:/service# ls -l telnetd
total 2
-rwxr-xr-x  1 root  wheel   64 Sep 20 11:34 run
drwx--  2 root  wheel  512 Dec 14 16:09 supervise
hal:/service# cat telnetd/run
#!/bin/sh
exec \
tcpserver -RH -D 0 telnet /usr/libexec/telnetd
hal:/service# svstat telnetd
telnetd: up (pid 224)
hal:/service# svc -d telnetd
hal:/service# svstat telnetd
telnetd: down, normally up
hal:/service# svc -u telnetd
hal:/service# svstat telnetd
telnetd: up (pid 40965)

init's role is assumed by a program named svscan. Of course, svscan not being
init, it cannot control daemons that background themselves.

http://cr.yp.to/daemontools.html

-- 
Jos Backus  _/ _/_/_/  "Reliability means never
   _/ _/   _/   having to say you're sorry."
  _/ _/_/_/ -- D. J. Bernstein
 _/  _/ _/_/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  _/_/  _/_/_/  use Std::Disclaimer;


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

[Rodney W. Grimes]

> On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 01:22:46AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
> 
>  > runlevels, OpenBSD does not or goes with an entirely different
>  > system), them would it be fair to consider FreeBSD "BSD"?  The
>  > advantage here is that FreeBSD would mature into it's own type of
>  > UNIX with a BSD heritage.
>  
> Can we please not have this thread again?  Anyone who is interested
> in following up on anything whatsoever to do with SysV runlevels 
> should first familiarize themselves with the numerous problems they
> have which have been hashed out on the lists several times over the
> last 12 months (hint:  to to the mail archive search engine at 
> www.freebsd.org and search for "runlevel").

Only correction here is ``over the last 7 years'' not ``12 months''.  This
will be atleast the 4th time we have been over this...


-- 
Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25)   [EMAIL PROTECTED]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

[Mark Newton]

On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 01:22:46AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:

 > runlevels, OpenBSD does not or goes with an entirely different
 > system), them would it be fair to consider FreeBSD "BSD"?  The
 > advantage here is that FreeBSD would mature into it's own type of
 > UNIX with a BSD heritage.
 
Can we please not have this thread again?  Anyone who is interested
in following up on anything whatsoever to do with SysV runlevels 
should first familiarize themselves with the numerous problems they
have which have been hashed out on the lists several times over the
last 12 months (hint:  to to the mail archive search engine at 
www.freebsd.org and search for "runlevel").

- mark

-- 
Mark Newton   Email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] (W)
Network Engineer  Email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  (H)
Internode Systems Pty Ltd Desk:   +61-8-82232999
"Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton"  Mobile: +61-416-202-223


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

[Donn Miller]

David Scheidt wrote:

> What's wrong with run with system V runlevels?  Other than it's system V and
> everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course.

Well, the one danger is that we'd be slowly drifting away from
the classic BSD way of doing thigs.  Of course, the official BSD
is dead (right?).  But OTOH, we want to carry FreeBSD forward, so
if that means we have to incorporate some SysVisms, then so be
it.  After all, SysV borrowed some things from BSD.

The second question I have is, do we try to stay on par with what
Open/NetBSD are doing?  Should we stick together, synchronise our
efforts, and try to define what comprises "BSD"?  Or, do we let
the 3 BSDs diverge completely?

Well, if the 3 diverge too far (ex:  FreeBSD implements SysV
runlevels, OpenBSD does not or goes with an entirely different
system), them would it be fair to consider FreeBSD "BSD"?  The
advantage here is that FreeBSD would mature into it's own type of
UNIX with a BSD heritage.

- Donn


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peter Jeremy writes
:
>On 1999-Dec-16 07:48:48 +1100, Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>And we don't really need YAD when we have init hanging around doing
>>nothing for its keep anyway...
>
>I beg to differ.  To quote init(8):
> The role of init is so critical that if it dies, the system will reboot
> itself automatically.  If, at bootstrap time, the init process cannot be
> located, the system will panic with the message ``panic: init died
> (signal %d, exit %d)''.
>
>This suggests that init needs to be very robust - which generally
>translates to `small and well audited'.  Non-core functionality
>(which IMHO includes devd) really belongs in another process.

Well, there are a lot of chicken & eggs issues with devd, which
may skew that a bit, but lets examine that when we get there.

>>and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to keep
>>important programs running, things like sshd, inetd, syslogd and
>>similar should be restarted if they die.
>
>It can do that now.  Add the following lines to /etc/ttys:
>
>sshd   "/usr/local/sbin/sshd" none on
>inetd  "/usr/sbin/inetd -Ww" none on
>syslogd"/usr/sbin/syslogd" none on
>
>(This ability has always been present, but is now documented).

Yes, but apart from the highly unintuitive name "/etc/ttys" any
process which involves edititing a file and signalling a process
has a big potential for races.

I would prefer if the lines could be added to /etc/ttys somewhat
like:
sshd "/usr/local/sbin/sshd" none ondemand

And then we could
telinit -on sshd
telinit -off sshd

or similar.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

[David Scheidt]

On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dav
> id Scheidt writes:
> >What's wrong with run with system V runlevels?  Other than it's system V and
> >everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course.   
> 
> runlevels are a very oldfashioned way to think about things, I don't
> want to have one big button which is called "NETWORKING ON/OFF".

runlevels let you do more than just run gettys, control networking, and run
/sbin/rc?.d scripts.  We do.

David Scheidt



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew
 Jacob writes:
>> >
>> >I was just thinking it could get tricky and have subtle ordering bugs of
>> >new tty devices, changes to ttys and signals all about the same time.
>> 
>> Well, they are no less subtle by having them in different processes...
>
>No, but possibly easier to track and debug. Just a minor nit. N'mind...

But lets say you add a pccard on which you want a getty, so devd will
have to tell init to run a getty on that port wouldn't it ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dav
id Scheidt writes:
>On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes:
>> 
>> I would really like to see the devd functionality to live in init
>> and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to keep
>> important programs running, things like sshd, inetd, syslogd and
>> similar should be restarted if they die.
>> 
>> No, I don't want sysV runlevels or the weird shit AIX has.  I'm sure
>> a clean and sensible way can be found, if some mental energies are
>> poured into the problem.
>
>What's wrong with run with system V runlevels?  Other than it's system V and
>everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course.   

runlevels are a very oldfashioned way to think about things, I don't
want to have one big button which is called "NETWORKING ON/OFF".

We need to be able to dynamically say "keep this puppy alive" and
later "ok, forget about that one from now on".

--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Init Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) ) )

[David Scheidt]

On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes:
> 
> I would really like to see the devd functionality to live in init
> and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to keep
> important programs running, things like sshd, inetd, syslogd and
> similar should be restarted if they die.
> 
> No, I don't want sysV runlevels or the weird shit AIX has.  I'm sure
> a clean and sensible way can be found, if some mental energies are
> poured into the problem.

What's wrong with run with system V runlevels?  Other than it's system V and
everything AT^HUSL did is evil, of course.   

David



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew
 Jacob writes:
>> >Isn't this throwing an awful lot onto init?
>> 
>> Not really...
>> 
>> The meta-daemon part is no different from keeping gettys in the air...
>> 
>> The devd thing consists of selecting on some magic fd and running a
>> program when something happens.  This could be done with a getty
>> like daemon too of course.
>
>I was just thinking it could get tricky and have subtle ordering bugs of
>new tty devices, changes to ttys and signals all about the same time.

Well, they are no less subtle by having them in different processes...

--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew
 Jacob writes:
>> 
>
>> I would really like to see the devd functionality to live in init
>> and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to keep
>> important programs running, things like sshd, inetd, syslogd and
>> similar should be restarted if they die.
>> 
>> No, I don't want sysV runlevels or the weird shit AIX has.  I'm sure
>> a clean and sensible way can be found, if some mental energies are
>> poured into the problem.
>> 
>
>Isn't this throwing an awful lot onto init?

Not really...

The meta-daemon part is no different from keeping gettys in the air...

The devd thing consists of selecting on some magic fd and running a
program when something happens.  This could be done with a getty
like daemon too of course.


--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warner Losh writes:
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
>: A "devd" program would solve 98% of what devfs could solve.  It cannot
>: solve the homebrew-a-vnode-for-the-root-fs problem.  FreeBSD needs a
>: "devd" program *anyway* because what good is dynamic devices if you
>: can't do something intelligent with them when they appear (mount/ifconfig
>: etc etc etc).
>
>Yes.  I'd like to see this in the future.  There is no reason to have
>pccardd after the cut over to the new code.  I don't think there is a
>reason to have both devd and usbd.  They all just do things when
>devices come and go.

And we don't really need YAD when we have init hanging around doing
nothing for its keep anyway...

I would really like to see the devd functionality to live in init
and at the same time I wouldn't mind if init were taught to keep
important programs running, things like sshd, inetd, syslogd and
similar should be restarted if they die.

No, I don't want sysV runlevels or the weird shit AIX has.  I'm sure
a clean and sensible way can be found, if some mental energies are
poured into the problem.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Warner Losh]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
: A "devd" program would solve 98% of what devfs could solve.  It cannot
: solve the homebrew-a-vnode-for-the-root-fs problem.  FreeBSD needs a
: "devd" program *anyway* because what good is dynamic devices if you
: can't do something intelligent with them when they appear (mount/ifconfig
: etc etc etc).

Yes.  I'd like to see this in the future.  There is no reason to have
pccardd after the cut over to the new code.  I don't think there is a
reason to have both devd and usbd.  They all just do things when
devices come and go.

Warner


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Daniel C. Sobral" writes:
>"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
>> 
>> Yea... been hearing that for 4 years... one of it's big short comings is
>> that it needs a persistent backing store for this.  Sounds like this C
>> program could fullfill one of the missing parts of devfs :-)

A "devd" program would solve 98% of what devfs could solve.  It cannot
solve the homebrew-a-vnode-for-the-root-fs problem.  FreeBSD needs a
"devd" program *anyway* because what good is dynamic devices if you
can't do something intelligent with them when they appear (mount/ifconfig
etc etc etc).


--
Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   "Real hackers run -current on their laptop."
FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Daniel C. Sobral]

"Rodney W. Grimes" wrote:
> 
> Yea... been hearing that for 4 years... one of it's big short comings is
> that it needs a persistent backing store for this.  Sounds like this C
> program could fullfill one of the missing parts of devfs :-)

F persistent backing store. The daemon solution is perfectly fine.

--
Daniel C. Sobral(8-DCS)
who is as social as a wampas

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Warner Losh]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Brian Somers writes:
: *cough*DEVFS*cough*

devfs*D*

Warner


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Mark Newton]

On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 01:39:28AM +, Brian Somers wrote:

 > [.]
 > > On a related subject: don't you think it's high time to end up this
 > > madness with MAKEDEV being a shell script, and reimplement it in C? Today,
 > [.]
 > *cough*DEVFS*cough*

Gesunteit.

   - mark

-- 
Mark Newton   Email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] (W)
Network Engineer  Email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  (H)
Internode Systems Pty Ltd Desk:   +61-8-82232999
"Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton"  Mobile: +61-416-202-223


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Rodney W. Grimes]

> [.]
> > On a related subject: don't you think it's high time to end up this
> > madness with MAKEDEV being a shell script, and reimplement it in C? Today,
> [.]
> *cough*DEVFS*cough*

Yea... been hearing that for 4 years... one of it's big short comings is
that it needs a persistent backing store for this.  Sounds like this C
program could fullfill one of the missing parts of devfs :-)


-- 
Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25)   [EMAIL PROTECTED]


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Re: MAKEDEV (Re: Speaking of moving files (Re: make world broken building fortunes ) )

[Brian Somers]

[.]
> On a related subject: don't you think it's high time to end up this
> madness with MAKEDEV being a shell script, and reimplement it in C? Today,
[.]
*cough*DEVFS*cough*
-- 
Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
     <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>




To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message