Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
>
> > Non-centralized configuration is frowned upon. Having to find which file
> > has something, or having to read through multiple files to understand
> > how the system is configured is a disadvantage wrt to the present
> > system.
>
> not so difficult if a command do t
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Mike Meyer wrote:
:Daniel C. Sobral writes:
:> Mike Meyer wrote:
:> The multiple levels are there to deal with changes in state. In BSD, for
:> instance, we have single user/multi-user. A number of other variations
:> can exist, both in heavy duty servers where you might want
"Daniel C. Sobral" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
> >
> > HP-UX :
> >
> > /sbin/init.d/script start_msg|stop_msg|start|stop (FMPOV, there isn't not
> > enough possible choises, such as status, restart, config, command, etc.)
> > /sbin/rc[S0-5].d/[SK][0-9][0-9][0-9]script l
Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
>
> > http://www.freebsd.org/~dfr/devices.html
>
> off topic.
M... I must have copied the wrong link, then...
> > http://www.freebsd.org/~eivind/newrc.html
>
> well. what about a mix of the SystemV approach (ala HP-UX) and the IRIX one
> (using something like chconf
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Mikel wrote:
>
> Kelly Yancey wrote:
>
> >
> > How about rather then separate directories, you prefix the symlink names
> > with 'S' for startup scripts and 'K' (for "kill") for shutdown scripts. Then,
> > you rename rc.d to rc3.d...
>
> I like it. It's clean and simple,
Daniel C. Sobral writes:
> Mike Meyer wrote:
> The multiple levels are there to deal with changes in state. In BSD, for
> instance, we have single user/multi-user. A number of other variations
> can exist, both in heavy duty servers where you might want to bring
> certain services down for upgrade
Andrzej Bialecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 10 Jul 2000, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
>
> > > and my favorite substitute proposal:
> > >
> > > http://www.roguetrader.com/~brandon/sas/.
> >
> > effectively, the last one is interresting. a major problem w/ this one is the
> > use of "perl" which
On 10 Jul 2000, Cyrille Lefevre wrote:
> > and my favorite substitute proposal:
> >
> > http://www.roguetrader.com/~brandon/sas/.
>
> effectively, the last one is interresting. a major problem w/ this one is the
> use of "perl" which is not available a boot time since it is located in /usr.
If
"Daniel C. Sobral" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mike Meyer wrote:
> >
> > Yes, that's correct. And yes, not all is bad in SysV. In particular,
> > having a directory where you can find scripts to stop (and restart)
> > subsystems is very nice. I think the multiple levels (rc?.d) is a bit
> > of
On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
> >
> > > and my favorite substitute proposal:
> > >
> > > http://www.roguetrader.com/~brandon/sas/.
> >
> > I really like the ideas in the last one. The pages were not updated for
> > some time - do you know if the author s
Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
>
> > and my favorite substitute proposal:
> >
> > http://www.roguetrader.com/~brandon/sas/.
>
> I really like the ideas in the last one. The pages were not updated for
> some time - do you know if the author still works on it?
No clue. At the time he decided to have a t
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> This has been talked to death. Look at these:
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/~dfr/devices.html
> http://www.freebsd.org/~eivind/newrc.html
>
> and my favorite substitute proposal:
>
> http://www.roguetrader.com/~brandon/sas/.
I really like the ideas
Johan,
I quite agree that in the simple but better approach of rc.conf (BSD). However I like
the idea of a configurable, directory driven approach to the shutdown. I would be
apposed to sysV style rc.d's as I really don't think they provide anything but
confusion. At the ISP where I work the BSD
Mike Meyer wrote:
>
> Yes, that's correct. And yes, not all is bad in SysV. In particular,
> having a directory where you can find scripts to stop (and restart)
> subsystems is very nice. I think the multiple levels (rc?.d) is a bit
> of overkill. Either the system is up (meaning everything is tu
Please Please Please _Dont_!!!
I dont know if someone is yoking, my english is not up to that :(
I tried to secure a Solaris machine and hated the whole setup. I't have
some good things but i take the simple rc.conf mechanism every time!
/Johan
On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Mikel wrote:
>
>
> Kelly
Kelly Yancey wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2000, Mike Meyer wrote:
>
> > > By all means, use start/stop args, but hard link the .sh files into seperate
> > > directories or something so that the order can be tweaked..
> >
> > If all you want is to make sure that shutdown happens in the reverse
> > ord
Cyrille Lefevre writes:
> Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > # Init: 300. Shutdown: -1. Description: Standard smtp (mail) daemon.
> > (indicating that it should be installed as /etc/init.d/300sendmail.sh,
> > and no shutdown installation is necessary).
> I guess you would like to says that
Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > By all means, use start/stop args, but hard link the .sh files into seperate
> > directories or something so that the order can be tweaked..
>
> If all you want is to make sure that shutdown happens in the reverse
> order of startup, that can be done by
On Sat, 8 Jul 2000, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > By all means, use start/stop args, but hard link the .sh files into seperate
> > directories or something so that the order can be tweaked..
>
> If all you want is to make sure that shutdown happens in the reverse
> order of startup, that can be done by
> By all means, use start/stop args, but hard link the .sh files into seperate
> directories or something so that the order can be tweaked..
If all you want is to make sure that shutdown happens in the reverse
order of startup, that can be done by reversing the list in
rc.shutdown. But how about
20 matches
Mail list logo
