bootscript fixes
Mostly for Bruce, but sent to list for everyone's review:
Attached are some fixes for the bootscripts. These are mostly cosmetic,
but there are some minor functional changes due in part to reverting to
multi-part writes to the screen, some clean-up/simplification of syntax,
for instance, == instead of = in comparison tests, use -a and -o
instead of ] [ or ] || [ resp., removed the second interactive
prompt, made available boot message prefixes and color ${INFO} for
mountvirtfs, made certain that control charcters are not written to the
boot log in case color codes are used in screen messages, and reduced
duplication of items in rc.site and init-functions (rc.site is required
for init-functions/rc). Please review, and discuss if necessary, before
commit.
Thanks.
-- DJ Lucas
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
diff -Naurp lfs-bootscripts-20111017-orig/lfs/init.d/checkfs lfs-bootscripts-20111017/lfs/init.d/checkfs
--- lfs-bootscripts-20111017-orig/lfs/init.d/checkfs 2011-09-19 03:31:46.0 +
+++ lfs-bootscripts-20111017/lfs/init.d/checkfs 2011-11-05 19:52:36.0 +
@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ case ${1} in
log_info_msg Checking file systems...
# Note: -a option used to be -p; but this fails e.g. on fsck.minix
- fsck ${options} -a -A -C -T
+ fsck ${options} -a -A -C -T /dev/null
error_value=${?}
if [ ${error_value} = 0 ]; then
diff -Naurp lfs-bootscripts-20111017-orig/lfs/init.d/cleanfs lfs-bootscripts-20111017/lfs/init.d/cleanfs
--- lfs-bootscripts-20111017-orig/lfs/init.d/cleanfs 2011-09-19 03:31:46.0 +
+++ lfs-bootscripts-20111017/lfs/init.d/cleanfs 2011-11-05 19:52:41.0 +
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ case ${1} in
log_info_msg Cleaning file systems:
if [ ${SKIPTMPCLEAN} = ]; then
- log_info_msg2 \n /tmp
+ log_info_msg2 /tmp
cd /tmp
find . -xdev -mindepth 1 ! -name lost+found -delete || failed=1
fi
diff -Naurp lfs-bootscripts-20111017-orig/lfs/init.d/consolelog lfs-bootscripts-20111017/lfs/init.d/consolelog
--- lfs-bootscripts-20111017-orig/lfs/init.d/consolelog 2011-09-19 03:31:46.0 +
+++ lfs-bootscripts-20111017/lfs/init.d/consolelog 1970-01-01 00:00:00.0 +
@@ -1,78 +0,0 @@
-#!/bin/sh
-
-# Begin consolelog
-#
-# Description : Set the kernel log level for the console
-#
-# Authors : Dan Nicholson - dnichol...@linuxfromscratch.org
-# Gerard Beekmans - ger...@linuxfromscratch.org
-# DJ Lucas - d...@linuxfromscratch.org
-# Update : Bruce Dubbs - bdu...@linuxfromscratch.org
-#
-# Version : LFS 7.0
-#
-# Notes : /proc must be mounted before this can run
-#
-
-
-### BEGIN INIT INFO
-# Provides:consolelog
-# Required-Start:
-# Should-Start:
-# Required-Stop:
-# Should-Stop:
-# Default-Start: S
-# Default-Stop:
-# Short-Description: Sets the console log level.
-# Description: Sets the console log level.
-# X-LFS-Provided-By: LFS
-### END INIT INFO
-
-. /lib/lsb/init-functions
-
-# set the default loglevel if needed
-LOGLEVEL=${LOGLEVEL:-7}
-
-[ -r /etc/sysconfig/console ] . /etc/sysconfig/console
-
-case ${1} in
- start)
- case $LOGLEVEL in
- [1-8])
- log_info_msg Setting the console log level to ${LOGLEVEL}...
- dmesg -n $LOGLEVEL
- evaluate_retval
- exit 0
- ;;
-
- *)
- log_failure_msg Console log level '${LOGLEVEL}' is invalid
- exit 1
- ;;
-
- esac
- ;;
-
- status)
- # Read the current value if possible
- if [ -r /proc/sys/kernel/printk ]; then
- read level line /proc/sys/kernel/printk
- else
- log_failure_msg Can't read the current console log level
- exit 1
- fi
-
- # Print the value
- if [ -n $level ]; then
- log_info_msg The current console log level is ${level}\n
- exit 0
- fi
- ;;
-
- *)
- echo Usage: ${0} {start|status}
- exit 1
- ;;
-esac
-
-# End consolelog
diff -Naurp lfs-bootscripts-20111017-orig/lfs/init.d/mountvirtfs lfs-bootscripts-20111017/lfs/init.d/mountvirtfs
--- lfs-bootscripts-20111017-orig/lfs/init.d/mountvirtfs 2011-09-19 03:31:46.0 +
+++ lfs-bootscripts-20111017/lfs/init.d/mountvirtfs 2011-11-05 19:53:19.0 +
@@ -36,15 +36,15 @@ case ${1} in
mount -n /run || failed=1
mkdir -p /run/{var,lock,shm}
- log_info_msg Mounting virtual file systems: /run
+ log_info_msg Mounting virtual file systems: ${INFO}/run
if ! mountpoint /proc /dev/null; then
- log_info_msg2 /proc
+ log_info_msg2 ${INFO}/proc
mount -n /proc || failed=1
fi
if ! mountpoint /sys
Re: bootscript fixes
DJ Lucas wrote:
Mostly for Bruce, but sent to list for everyone's review:
Attached are some fixes for the bootscripts. These are mostly cosmetic,
but there are some minor functional changes due in part to reverting to
multi-part writes to the screen, some clean-up/simplification of syntax,
for instance, == instead of = in comparison tests, use -a and -o
instead of ] [ or ] || [ resp., removed the second interactive
prompt, made available boot message prefixes and color ${INFO} for
mountvirtfs, made certain that control charcters are not written to the
boot log in case color codes are used in screen messages, and reduced
duplication of items in rc.site and init-functions (rc.site is required
for init-functions/rc). Please review, and discuss if necessary, before
commit.
I appreciate the fixes. I'll review the diff in more detail, but note
that I used = instead of == for string comparisons explicitly because
the bash man page says:
string1 == string2
True if the strings are equal. = may be used in place of == for
strict POSIX compliance.
I was trying to make the scripts Bourne/Posix compatible.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: bootscript fixes
On 11/05/2011 04:15 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
Mostly for Bruce, but sent to list for everyone's review:
Attached are some fixes for the bootscripts. These are mostly cosmetic,
but there are some minor functional changes due in part to reverting to
multi-part writes to the screen, some clean-up/simplification of syntax,
for instance, == instead of = in comparison tests, use -a and -o
instead of ] [ or ] || [ resp., removed the second interactive
prompt, made available boot message prefixes and color ${INFO} for
mountvirtfs, made certain that control charcters are not written to the
boot log in case color codes are used in screen messages, and reduced
duplication of items in rc.site and init-functions (rc.site is required
for init-functions/rc). Please review, and discuss if necessary, before
commit.
I appreciate the fixes. I'll review the diff in more detail, but note
that I used = instead of == for string comparisons explicitly because
the bash man page says:
string1 == string2
True if the strings are equal. = may be used in place of == for
strict POSIX compliance.
I was trying to make the scripts Bourne/Posix compatible.
-- Bruce
Although I hadn't actually noticed that init-functions used /bin/sh for
the interpreter prior to your mention POSIX above, I fortunately only
made the comparison and logical and/or changes in the rc script which
uses /bin/bash for the schebang (it looks as if this is the only script
to do this as well). The goal was consistency. You are correct, a single
= character must be used for comparison tests in init-functions for
POSIX compliance. I'll drop in a couple of random scripts using dash or
ash as the interpreter tonight or tomorrow to make sure, but I believe
all is well. It could be argued, however, that we should drop to /bin/sh
for the interpreter used in the rc script and do the reverse. If agreed,
just respond here and ignore the earlier patch (I'm pretty sure we
should probably use sh syntax and avoid mixing the two for consistency).
I'll reverse those specific changes and get a corrected one tested
tomorrow or later tonight along with the proposed cosmetic changes. I'm
going to build ash and symlink to /bin/sh now to get a thorough test
done. I'll get to dash later in the week.
-- DJ Lucas
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: bootscript fixes
DJ Lucas wrote:
On 11/05/2011 04:15 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
Mostly for Bruce, but sent to list for everyone's review:
Attached are some fixes for the bootscripts. These are mostly cosmetic,
but there are some minor functional changes due in part to reverting to
multi-part writes to the screen, some clean-up/simplification of syntax,
for instance, == instead of = in comparison tests, use -a and -o
instead of ] [ or ] || [ resp., removed the second interactive
prompt, made available boot message prefixes and color ${INFO} for
mountvirtfs, made certain that control charcters are not written to the
boot log in case color codes are used in screen messages, and reduced
duplication of items in rc.site and init-functions (rc.site is required
for init-functions/rc). Please review, and discuss if necessary, before
commit.
I appreciate the fixes. I'll review the diff in more detail, but note
that I used = instead of == for string comparisons explicitly because
the bash man page says:
string1 == string2
True if the strings are equal. = may be used in place of == for
strict POSIX compliance.
I was trying to make the scripts Bourne/Posix compatible.
-- Bruce
Although I hadn't actually noticed that init-functions used /bin/sh for
the interpreter prior to your mention POSIX above, I fortunately only
made the comparison and logical and/or changes in the rc script which
uses /bin/bash for the schebang (it looks as if this is the only script
to do this as well). The goal was consistency. You are correct, a single
= character must be used for comparison tests in init-functions for
POSIX compliance. I'll drop in a couple of random scripts using dash or
ash as the interpreter tonight or tomorrow to make sure, but I believe
all is well. It could be argued, however, that we should drop to /bin/sh
for the interpreter used in the rc script and do the reverse. If agreed,
just respond here and ignore the earlier patch (I'm pretty sure we
should probably use sh syntax and avoid mixing the two for consistency).
I'll reverse those specific changes and get a corrected one tested
tomorrow or later tonight along with the proposed cosmetic changes. I'm
going to build ash and symlink to /bin/sh now to get a thorough test
done. I'll get to dash later in the week.
Yes, the init.d/rc file was explicitly bash and I'd like it to stay that
way. The others can be (probably should be) sh compatible. Bash is an
integral part of LFS and specifying that doesn't hurt anything.
Reviewing though, I see I wasn't consistent.
More comments in a bit.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: bootscript fixes
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
Mostly for Bruce, but sent to list for everyone's review:
I had left the definitions
NORMAL=\\033[0;39m # Standard console grey
SUCCESS=\\033[1;32m# Success is green
WARNING=\\033[1;33m# Warnings are yellow
FAILURE=\\033[1;31m# Failures are red
INFO=\\033[1;36m # Information is light cyan
BRACKET=\\033[1;34m# Brackets are blue
in init-functions to handle the case when a user may have deleted them
from rc.site.
Same for the DISTRO vars in init.d/rc
-
I'm not sure we want to set LOGLEVEL every time we change run level.
Perhaps that should be wrapped in
if [ ${runlevel} == S ]; then dmesg -n ${LOGLEVEL:-7}; fi
-
The purpose of log_info_msg2 was to be able to put something in the middle:
log_info_msg Start of message...
...
log_info_msg2 Something else
(exit $RET)
evalutate_retval
So it would come out as:
Start of message...Something else [ OK ]
Adding ${BMPREFIX} to log_info_msg2 would change that behavior. See the
modules script.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: bootscript fixes
On 11/05/2011 06:04 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
Mostly for Bruce, but sent to list for everyone's review:
I had left the definitions
NORMAL=\\033[0;39m # Standard console grey
SUCCESS=\\033[1;32m# Success is green
WARNING=\\033[1;33m# Warnings are yellow
FAILURE=\\033[1;31m# Failures are red
INFO=\\033[1;36m # Information is light cyan
BRACKET=\\033[1;34m# Brackets are blue
in init-functions to handle the case when a user may have deleted them
from rc.site.
Same for the DISTRO vars in init.d/rc
Ahh..okay, they should be left then as ones in rc.site take precedence.
-
I'm not sure we want to set LOGLEVEL every time we change run level.
Perhaps that should be wrapped in
if [ ${runlevel} == S ]; then dmesg -n ${LOGLEVEL:-7}; fi
Yes, there is no longer any need for the consolelog script as we do not
change logging level in any of the scripts. It is not necessary to have
/proc or /sys mounted to set the kernel log level when using dmesg. Note
that this could also be set any number of other ways (including via
sysctl). If you want a really clean look, it is important to set this as
early as possible. With LOGLEVEL set to 4 in early rc, All boot messages
show on screen, nothing out of place, including the welcome message for
interactive prompt.
-
The purpose of log_info_msg2 was to be able to put something in the middle:
log_info_msg Start of message...
...
log_info_msg2 Something else
(exit $RET)
evalutate_retval
So it would come out as:
Start of message...Something else [ OK ]
Adding ${BMPREFIX} to log_info_msg2 would change that behavior. See the
modules script.
Opps that wasn't supposed to be left in there, added it by mistake when
I added the removal of non-printable characters. I still have one issue
with logging, a couple of OK messages out of place, but I'll post a fix
back when I find the issue (was there before I started mucking around
with them).
Thanks for the review...changing local copy with the above now. I'll be
able to trudge through the rest of them tonight, but I'm pretty sure all
is well. Everything changed above was simply for aesthetic purposes --
colon for lists instead of trailing dots (mountvirtfs and cleanfs), or
lines without output (ifup), boot message prefixes, double welcome
message... I'm still gonna revisit the added ifdown functionality and
service functions, even if only for downstream users, but they look real
good. Sorry I'm only now getting to review them. I also have a few
scripts laying around for BLFS that are not in the contrib/lsb directory
that should be suitable for the current scripts, I'll get to those when
I get to building them.
-- DJ Lucas
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
