While this is probably not the place to post this, I will also note
that the use of 'snprintf' was denigrated because it was NOT part
of the original 'printf' package.
You learn from your mistakes, you do NOT enshrine them and worship
them as the Truth of Ancestral Wisdom.
I will simply state
Narvi wrote:
>
> Errrmmm Really, did you check the archives for the issue?
>
> There used to be a real long thread on why/why not sysV style init
> scripts. It produced not one but several flamewars iirc 8-)
>
> In short - if we change from the present scheme, we want something better
> tha
>
> > Yeah, I was just joking, I kinda like some things about SVR4, but I still
> > think it would be nice to keep the option of using some of the regular rc
> > scripts that we have now. Imagine the confusion of the people that have
> > ONLY used FreeBSD when they go in and see rc.d and all it's
On Tue, May 09, 2000 at 12:12:44PM -0400, Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote:
> Yeah, I was just joking, I kinda like some things about SVR4, but I still
> think it would be nice to keep the option of using some of the regular rc
> scripts that we have now.
What I am prosing aguments what we have today (
Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote:
> Yeah, I was just joking, I kinda like some things about SVR4, but I still
> think it would be nice to keep the option of using some of the regular rc
> scripts that we have now. Imagine the confusion of the people that have
> ONLY used FreeBSD when they go in and see
Will Andrews wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:53:16PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> > Point well taken. If anyone has references to this work, or an easy
> > introduction to netbsd's version I'd love to look at them. I've been
> > hoping to carve out some time to work on this, but every
> >
> > Just curious, but wouldn't this be FreeSVR4??? :-)
>
> I'm going to assume that the smiley means you're joking, but I hope
> that we can stick to discussing this plan on its merits, rather than
> rejecting it out of hand because it's like something that someone else
> is doing.
>
On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 11:53:16PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> Point well taken. If anyone has references to this work, or an easy
> introduction to netbsd's version I'd love to look at them. I've been
> hoping to carve out some time to work on this, but every time I talk
> about vacation, m
Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Point well taken. If anyone has references to this work, or an easy
>introduction to netbsd's version I'd love to look at them.
There's useful stuff in the rc(8) and rcorder(8) manual pages, but I
can't find any more convenient copies of them other
entry points for the scripts.
What happens if the restarting is not an atomic, independent act?
On Sat, 6 May 2000, Will Andrews wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've noticed an inconsistency among our ports. It seems that not every port
> that installs rc.d startup scripts includes me
On Mon, 08 May 2000 23:53:16 MST, Doug Barton wrote:
> > Eivind Eklund made a prototype some time back which addressed this issue -
> > you'd do well to take a look at that one first before reinventing the
> > wheel :)
>
> Point well taken. If anyone has references to this work, or an ea
Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote:
>
> Just curious, but wouldn't this be FreeSVR4??? :-)
I'm going to assume that the smiley means you're joking, but I hope
that we can stick to discussing this plan on its merits, rather than
rejecting it out of hand because it's like something that someone el
Kris Kennaway wrote:
>
> On Sun, 7 May 2000, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> > I'm going to reply to the system part of this too, replies to this
> > thread should split off to -current. I have a design in mind for a new
> > rc system that uses scripts with "start, stop, status" operators to both
>
Just curious, but wouldn't this be FreeSVR4??? :-)
=
| Kenneth Culver | FreeBSD: The best OS around.|
| Unix Systems Administrator | ICQ #: 24767726 |
| and student at The | AIM: muythaibxr
Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 7 May 2000, Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> I'm going to reply to the system part of this too, replies to this
>> thread should split off to -current. I have a design in mind for a new
>> rc system that uses scripts with "start, stop, status" operator
On Sun, 7 May 2000, Doug Barton wrote:
> I'm going to reply to the system part of this too, replies to this
> thread should split off to -current. I have a design in mind for a new
> rc system that uses scripts with "start, stop, status" operators to both
> upgrade and downgrade services, w
Will Andrews wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I've noticed an inconsistency among our ports. It seems that not every port
> that installs rc.d startup scripts includes methods to not only startup,
> but also shutdown and/or restart, where appropriate. (Sent to -ports for
&g
Le 2000-05-07, Mike Nowlin écrivait :
> stuff that sends SIGHUP to Apache. Gated got it right - add a simple
> program (gdc) that does the extra stuff. If we could get the ports
Bind has that as well with 'ndc', and apache with apachectl.
Such helper scripts are indeed very useful, and it owul
> Fine, you can quote historical context to argue against doing something
> similar to SVR4 init. I, however, see nothing wrong with making it easier
> to manage the daemons. Of course, that does not necessarily need to go in
> the rc.d scripts.
This is as it should be.. "rc" files (and directo
On Sat, May 06, 2000 at 04:15:33PM -0400, Brandon D. Valentine wrote:
> You have answered your own question. What exists in ${PREFIX}/etc/rc.d
> are startup scripts, *not* shutdown or restart scripts.
Okay, then you think that all the ports rc.d *.sh scripts should be changed
only to allow start
On Sat, 6 May 2000, Will Andrews wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I've noticed an inconsistency among our ports. It seems that not every port
>that installs rc.d startup scripts includes methods to not only startup,
>but also shutdown and/or restart, where appropriate. (Sent to -port
Hello,
I've noticed an inconsistency among our ports. It seems that not every port
that installs rc.d startup scripts includes methods to not only startup,
but also shutdown and/or restart, where appropriate. (Sent to -ports for
ports hackers' opinions.)
Shouldn't this s
22 matches
Mail list logo
