Manually starting RCng scripts disabled in rc.conf
Is it possible to manually run an rcNG-style script with app_enable=NO in /etc/rc.conf? For instance, there are a few services that I don't want running all the time on my laptop (like Apache, Squid, DansGuardian) but that I need running now and then for development / testing purposes. As such, I have apache_enable="NO" in my rc.conf to prevent Apache from starting at boot time. However, this also means that I cannot manually start Apache when I need it running, unless I use apachectl or run the httpd binary directly. And I can't use the RCng script to check the status, or restart, or any of the other nice things that RCng gives me. It would be much simpler/nicer if I could use the rcNG script to do this. Am I missing something simple, or is it just not possible to do what I want? I'd like to use the rc.d scripts to control everything, but if I have to enable them all in rc.conf and then manually stop them after each boot, I'll most likely end up writing my own non-RCng wrapper scripts for each app. :( Please CC: me as I'm not subscribed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Freddie Cash [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Manually starting RCng scripts disabled in rc.conf
On May 17, 2004 09:56 am, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > On Monday 17 May 2004 18:51, Freddie Cash wrote: > > Is it possible to manually run an rcNG-style script with > > app_enable=NO in /etc/rc.conf? > > > > For instance, there are a few services that I don't want running > > all the time on my laptop (like Apache, Squid, DansGuardian) but > > that I need running now and then for development / testing > > purposes. As such, I have apache_enable="NO" in my rc.conf to > > prevent Apache from starting at boot time. However, this also > > means that I cannot manually start Apache when I need it running, > > unless I use apachectl or run the httpd binary directly. And I > > can't use the RCng script to check the status, or restart, or any > > of the other nice things that RCng gives me. It would be much > > simpler/nicer if I could use the rcNG script to do this. > > > > Am I missing something simple, or is it just not possible to do > > what I want? I'd like to use the rc.d scripts to control > > everything, but if I have to enable them all in rc.conf and then > > manually stop them after each boot, I'll most likely end up writing > > my own non-RCng wrapper scripts for each app. :( > What you could do is comment "apache_enable=yes" in rc.conf when > you're not using it. > Then if you need to start apache later on, just uncomment the line > then do a /usr/local/etc/rc.d/apache start That's the same as I'm doing now, although I'm manually editing rc.conf to change NO to YES and back again using sed. It's still an extra step that seems unnecessary. Perhaps there needs to be an app_enable_boot="YES" kind of knob for rc.conf that would start (or not) the app at boot time, but that wouldn't prevent you from manually starting the app using the rc.d script. [shrug] -- Freddie Cash [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Manually starting RCng scripts disabled in rc.conf
On May 17, 2004 10:16 am, JJB wrote: > There are no knobs in rc.conf for the applications you mentioned. > Rc.conf does not have internal check to verify you have correct > statements. So having apache_enable="YES" in rc.conf does nothing > and issues no error message telling you it is invalid. All ports > are started from /usr/local/etc/rc.d/ This is true only for non-RCng scripts that have the generic case statement with start/stop options. For instance, the www/apache13 port prior to around 1.3.29_4 used the old rc-style script. After that, it uses an RCng script which requires an entry in rc.conf to activate. Read through the comments in /usr/ports/www/apache13/files/apache.sh if you don't have it installed to see what I mean. RCng scripts require an entry in /etc/rc.conf along the lines of _enable="YES" otherwise the script will fail to do anything. This works great for starting scripts at boot time as everything is configured / controlled via one central file. However, it's more of a pain than anything when you don't want the app to start at bootup, but want to start the app manually later on. There are workarounds by changing the name of the startup script or editing rc.conf. I'm just wondering if there is anything built into RCng for this situation. Please CC: me as I'm not sub'd to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Freddie Cash [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: FreeBSD 4.4-REL to FreeBSD 4.8-STABLE upgrade problem.
On July 7, 2003 01:57 pm, Dustin Puryear wrote: > I have a test server that is being used to test a 4.4-REL to > 4.8-STABLE upgrade, and I've found the system will no longer boot > unless I load a saved 4.4-REL kernel. The error I get is along the > lines of: > Mounting root from ufs:/dev/ad4s1a > Root mount failed: 16 > Per /usr/src/UPDATING there was a change in the ATA drive at 4.5-REL, > but it mentioned running mergemaster to create the new devices, and > according to /usr/src/Makefile I shouldn't do that until I get past > the current stage (which is where I am stuck): > (/usr/src/Makefile comments) > 1. cd /usr/src > 2. make buildworld > 3. make buildkernel > 4. make installkernel > 5. reboot > 6. mergemaster -p There's your problem. You should run "mergemaster -p" as step 2. The -p means "Pre-buildworld". -- Freddie CashDistrict HelpDesk / Network Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] (250) 374-0679 ext. 219 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: OpenOffice 3.2 fails to build on FreeBSD 8.0-STABLE/amd64
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Sean McAfee < smca...@collaborativefusion.com> wrote: > O. Hartmann wrote: > >> As I mentioned, I did not and I can't risk deinstalling the working OO >> first and then installing and probably a failing OO 3.2. >> >> Regards, >> >> O. Hartmann >> > > You can use `pkg_create -b name_of_port-with_version` to create a binary > backup. If you can't get 3.2 installed, you just run pkg_add on the > resulting tbz and you're back in business. > > I do this whenever I upgrade OO, Firefox, Thunderbird, or anything other > program I can't wait around for while I freshly compile. portmaster and portupgrade both include a -b switch as well, which will create a backup package before uninstalling the port to install the new version. -- Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: NFSv4: mount -t nsf4 not the same as mount_newnfs?
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Rick Macklem wrote: > ps: ZFS also has its own export stuff, but it is my understanding that >putting a line in /etc/exports is sufficient. I've never used ZFS, >so others will know more than I. > My understanding (from having used NFS and ZFS, haven't looked at the code) is that: The sharenfs property for a ZFS dataset gets written out to /etc/zfs/exports, which gets appended to the mountd command-line by default. Thus, you can use /etc/exports or sharenfs property, whichever is easier. # zfs get sharenfs storage/backup NAMEPROPERTY VALUE SOURCE storage/backup sharenfs -maproot=root 192.168.0.12 local # cat /etc/exports # cat /etc/zfs/exports # !!! DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE MANUALLY !!! /storage/backup -maproot=root 192.168.0.12 # pgrep -lf exports 1381 /usr/sbin/mountd -r -p 32000 /etc/exports /etc/zfs/exports -- Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: filesystem: 12h to delete 32GB of data
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote: > Gary Gatten wrote: >> OT now, but in high i/o envs with high concurrency needs, RAID5 is >> still the way to go, esp if 90% of i/o is reads. Of course it depends >> on file size / type as well... Anyway, let's sum it up with "a >> storage subsystem is only as fast as its slowest link" > > It's not just the balance of reads over writes. It's the size and > sequential location of the IO requests. RAID5 is good for sequential reads > -- eg. > streaming a video -- where the system can read whole blocks from all the > drives involved, calculate parity over the whole lot and then push all that > blob of data up to the CPU. > > RAID5 is pretty pessimal if your usage pattern is small reads or writes > randomly scattered over your storage area -- eg. typical RDBMS behaviour > -- which works a great deal better on RAID10. > > I'd also contend that the essential difference between a really good fast > hardware raid controller and something disappointingly mundane is a decent > amount of non-volatile cache memory. For most H/W raid that equates to > using a battery backup unit. I've been thinking though that a few GB of > fast solid-state hard drive configured as a gjournal for a RAID10 (ie > gstripe +gmirror) might achieve the same effect for rather less outlay... It > would probably not be too shabby with RAID5 even, but of course you'ld > lose the benefit of offloading parity calculations onto the RAID > controller's CPU. Still, modern multi-core CPUs are probably fast enough > nowadays to > make that viable for many purposes. Depending on the number of drives you are using, ZFS would also be worth looking at. The raidz implementation works quite nicely, and (in theory) doesn't suffer from the major issues that RAID5/6 does. It also does implicit striping across all vdevs, so you can make some very fancy RAID layouts (each vdev can be mirrored, raidz1, raidz2, or just a bunch of disks). I don't know if the version of ZFS in FreeBSD 7.x supports hybrid pools, but the version in FreeBSD 8.0 should, which lets you add SSDs to the pool to be used automatically as "cache" in-between RAM and harddrives. -- Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
