www/tomcat7 bug in rc.d startup script when clear_tmp_enable="YES"

[Doug Barton]

On 09/06/2011 13:10, Devin Teske wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Doug Barton [mailto:dougb at FreeBSD.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 1:02 PM
>> To: Devin Teske
>> Cc: freebsd-rc at freebsd.org; ale at FreeBSD.org
>> Subject: Re: www/tomcat7 bug in rc.d startup script when
>> clear_tmp_enable="YES"
>>
>> On 09/06/2011 12:57, Devin Teske wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Doug Barton [mailto:dougb at FreeBSD.org]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 12:51 PM
>>>> To: Devin Teske
>>>> Cc: freebsd-rc at freebsd.org; ale at FreeBSD.org
>>>> Subject: Re: www/tomcat7 bug in rc.d startup script when
>>>> clear_tmp_enable="YES"
>>>>
>>>> On 09/06/2011 12:46, Devin Teske wrote:
>>>>> On a side-note, is "REQUIRE" essentially analogous to "AFTER"
>>>>
>>>> man rcorder
>>>
>>> Why would you RTFM me with the same man page that I just referenced?
>>> (rcorder(8))
>>>
>>> HINT: Try reading before replying (you replied to a partial sentence;
>>> 'tsk 'tsk).
>>
>> Seriously?
> 
> Yes, seriously. It's poor netiquette.

Ok, let me try again.

Your question indicated that you have no real understanding of how rc.d
works at all. Since I try to help people understand it better, I took
the time to reply to your question rather than just ignore it. I limited
my reply to the simplest form of your question and gave you the the
proper reading material to answer it for yourself.

FYI, that is NOT a "RTFM" response. The reason that you even know the
term "RTFM" is that an actual "RTFM" response is in fact, simply,
"RTFM," nothing more. I even took the time to make sure that your
question is in fact answered in that manual, and told you which manual
to read. The fact that you need to take the time to educate yourself
once I've pointed you in the right direction is just how it works.

Oh, and while you're at it, you should probably read the other
rc.d-related man pages, and the 3 related articles in the handbook,
porter's handbook, etc.

>>> I was asking you if you think that there is a warranted need to add an "AFTER"
>>> feature which rcorder(8) currently lacks.
>>
>> I understood the question. Do you understand the answer?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> Who in their right mind would have extrapolated a contextual response such as:
> 
> 'Why, no, I don't think that there is a need for an "AFTER" feature, since the "REQUIRE" keyword accomplishes the same thing.'
> 
> From your actual response of:
> 
> 'man rcorder'
> 
> There's no implied context in your response.

The context is pretty simple. Go read the man page, and you will have
your question answered. I've worked pretty hard to make sure that the
documentation is at least reasonably accurate, so my assumption is that
if you don't understand the man page you're probably not going to
understand any other response from me either.

> It looks like a blatant uncontextual RTFM (especially so since it came through in under 10 seconds).
> 
> Shit, the least you could have done was the following to let me know that you were giving a contextual response:
> 
> man rcorder | less +/BUGS

I specifically didn't indicate a specific section to read because I
wanted you to read the whole thing.


Doug

PS, keep your language family-friendly on the FreeBSD lists. Thanks.

-- 

	Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
			-- OK Go

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/