Re: rc.d and ports
From: Oliver Eikemeier (eikemeier_at_fillmore-labs.com)
Date: 02/23/04
- Previous message: Mike Makonnen: "rc.d and ports"
- In reply to: Mike Makonnen: "rc.d and ports"
- Next in thread: Mike Makonnen: "Re: rc.d and ports"
- Reply: Mike Makonnen: "Re: rc.d and ports"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 11:46:23 +0100 To: Mike Makonnen <mtm@identd.net>
Mike Makonnen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A lot of people have been calling to have ports startup scripts
> integrated into rc.d. I have finally gotten arround to doing it.
> Attached are the rc.d patches to make it work, but
> I will need some cooperation from the ports folks.
See PR 56736, there since Sep 2003:
<http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/56736>
If you don't like it, please provide feedback what you think can be improved.
> Essentialy the rc.d patches will recognize a ports script and source
> the appropriate configuration files. From the user's point of view
> there will be two major differences:
> 1. No more fooport.sh-sample files that must be renamed to enable the port
> 2. Ports can be configured from /etc/rc.conf (or /usr/local/etc/rc.conf).
Except the /usr/local/etc/rc.conf this is what a lot of ports already do.
> To make this work here's what's needed from the ports makefiles.
> This is just a general sketch of what needs to be done. The
> ports folks can do this however they deem appropriate.
>
> The makefile for the port should define a variable:
>
> RCVAR_NAME="fooport_enable"
>
> Then, logic similar to this should be inserted in the appropriate
> bsd.port* makefile:
>
> if ! grep 1>/dev/null "\$${RCVAR_NAME}=" ${PREFIX}/etc/defaults/rc.conf ; then
> echo "${RCVAR_NAME}=NO" >> ${PREFIX}/etc/defaults/rc.conf
> fi
I guess we don't need this (and shouldn't do it, since ${PREFIX}/etc/defaults/rc.conf
might be read-only). Defaulting xxx_enable to "NO" seems to be sufficient, with
[ -z "$xxx_enable" ] && xxx_enable="NO"
or
xxx_enable=${xxx_enable:-"NO"}
before calling load_rc_config $name
> [...]
>
> I know from cursory glances at -current mail that people are divided
> on whether to have /usr/local/etc/{rc.conf,rc.conf.d} or to support
> only /etc/rc.conf. Both will be supported. It's the user's choice
> whether he wants every thing in /etc/rc.conf or /usr/local/etc/rc.conf.
> However, a /usr/local/etc/defaults/rc.conf is needed because that is where
> the default values for ports config knobs will be kept and because they
> should be kept separately from base system knobs.
Adding /usr/local/etc/rc.conf maybe a good idea, but I don't see the need
for a /usr/local/etc/defaults/rc.conf.
> Comments/Corrections solicited.
See above. If I get feedback I well incorporate /usr/local/etc/defaults/rc.conf
support in PR 56736.
Regards
Oliver
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Mike Makonnen: "rc.d and ports"
- In reply to: Mike Makonnen: "rc.d and ports"
- Next in thread: Mike Makonnen: "Re: rc.d and ports"
- Reply: Mike Makonnen: "Re: rc.d and ports"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
