[PATCH] Fancy rc startup style RFC - v6

[David Barbero]

Eric Anderson escribió:
>> After to apply the patch, so that it works is necessary to put in
>> rc.conf
>> rc_fancy="YES ", when put this single entry, the system gives errors
>> saying that correctly this entry in rc.conf is not correctly defined,
>> adding single rc_fancy_color="YES" gives the same error.
>> If the two entry meetings are added it don't show the error.
>> I believe that serious advisable that these two entry did not depend the
>> one on the other and worked separately.
>
> Well, obviously the _color option depends on the rc_fancy option being
> enabled, otherwise it doesn't make sense, however you can of course have
> rc_fancy enabled with rc_fancy_color disabled.

yes, this is obvious, but i say rc_fancy depends on the rc_fancy_color,
disabled or no, in rc.conf, if you don't put a entry for rc_fancy_color in
rc.conf, the boot menssage show error.

> Yep, that's a bug.  I think it's fixed in v7, available here:
>
> http://www.googlebit.com/freebsd/patches/rc_fancy.patch-7
>
> along with a few other suggestions from others.

Ok, i will probe this patch in a few days and tell you for this. Probably
Sunday can say something, right now I am of business trip and I do not
have my PC of tests here...

>> Another one of the failures that I have seen is that with this patch
>> they
>> show all the services, they are or not formed to start, I believe that
>> single they would have to appear the services that are formed to start
>> and
>> not all those that can start.
>
> If the service is run on bootup, it shows it.  It was still being run
> before, there was just no output previously.  It would be pretty easy to
> have an option to not print these, maybe an rc_fancy_verbose option.  Is
> this desirable to most?

I think a _verbose option don't for now, but can will be interesting.

In any case I talked about that if you don't start a service (Ex:
geli_enable="NO" in rc.conf) at boot time, in your patch this service it's
show, and IMHO, if the service don't start at bootup, then don't show
startup.

>> In addition  the services that are not formed to start appear like [ OK
>> ],
>> in the case of appearing these, I believe that they would have to leave
>> with another denomination that is not [ OK ].
>
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here.  Can you give me an example?

Sorry for my English :)

Yes, of course.

in rc.conf:
geli_enable="NO"
inetd_enable="NO"

And when yo reboot, the bootup menssage show:

geli service                           [OK]
inetd service                          [OK]

And I believe that this menssage don't show on startup, or in the case of
show the messange, this don't show the [OK], in that case, show [SKIP],
for example.

>> Another failure that I have seen is that when leaving the message
>> syslogd
>> this sample failure, but this service starts without problems, but shows
>> it as if it gave failure...
>
> My syslogd looks clean, and doesn't give a false failure.  I'm not sure
> how to look into this - can you confirm that it truly is passing, but
> giving the wrong message, or is it that the rc subsystem thinks it's
> failing but appears to work ok?

My syslogd work properly whitout any error, but give a false positive, I
will be probe the last patch and I will try to see if I locate the
failure, but will have Sunday...

I see other fail in show the fancy_* when I have activated vidcontrol to
1024x764, but this is but so that it is pretty that an operation failure,
IMHO is not important...

> Thanks for all the feedback and testing!

:)

> Eric

Regards

-- 
"Linux is for people who hate Windows, BSD is for
people who love UNIX"
"Social Engineer -> Because there is no patch for human stupidity"