On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 12:29:28PM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote, and it was proclaimed: > Eric Anderson wrote: > >Coleman Kane wrote: > >>On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 12:29:20PM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote: > >>>On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 02:16:04PM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote: > >>>>Brooks Davis wrote: > >>>>>On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 02:13:22PM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote: > >>>>>>Brooks Davis wrote: > >>>>>>>On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:23:32PM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote: > >>>>>>>>Coleman Kane wrote: > >>>>>>>>>On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:45:09AM -0500, Eric Anderson wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>Eric Anderson wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Actually, some other things got changed somewhere in the > >>>>>>>>>>history, that broke some things and assumptions I was making. > >>>>>>>>>>This patch has them fixed, and I've tested it with all the > >>>>>>>>>>different options: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>http://www.googlebit.com/freebsd/patches/rc_fancy.patch-9 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>It's missing the defaults/rc.conf diffs, but you should > >>>>>>>>>>already know those. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Eric > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>I have a new patch (to 7-CURRENT) of the "fancy_rc" updates. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>This allows the use of: > >>>>>>>>>rc_fancy="YES" ---> Turns on fancy reporting (w/o color) > >>>>>>>>>rc_fancy_color="YES" ---> Turns on fancy reporting (w/ > >>>>>>>>>color), needs > >>>>>>>>> rc_fancy="YES" > >>>>>>>>>rc_fancy_colour="YES" ---> Same as above for you on the other > >>>>>>>>>side of > >>>>>>>>> the pond. > >>>>>>>>>rc_fancy_verbose="YES" --> Turn on more verbose activity > >>>>>>>>>messages. > >>>>>>>>> This will cause what appear to be "false > >>>>>>>>> positives", where an unused service is > >>>>>>>>> "OK" instead of "SKIP". > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>You can also customize the colors, the widths of the message > >>>>>>>>>brackets (e.g. [ OK ] vs. [ OK ]), the screen width, and > >>>>>>>>>the contents of the message (OK versus GOOD versus BUENO). > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Also, we have the following message combinations: > >>>>>>>>>OK ---> Universal good message > >>>>>>>>>SKIP,SKIPPED ---> Two methods for conveying the same idea? > >>>>>>>>>ERROR,FAILED ---> Ditto above, for failure cases > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Should we just have 3 different messages, rather than 5 messages > >>>>>>>>>in 3 categories? > >>>>>>>>Yes, that's something that started with my first patch, and > >>>>>>>>never got ironed out. I think it should be: > >>>>>>>>OK > >>>>>>>>SKIPPED > >>>>>>>>FAILED > >>>>>>>>and possibly also: > >>>>>>>>ERROR > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>The difference between FAILED and ERROR would be that FAILED > >>>>>>>>means the service did not start at all, and ERROR means it > >>>>>>>>started but had some kind of error response. > >>>>>>>FAILED vs ERROR seems confusing. I'd be inclined toward WARNING vs > >>>>>>>FAILED or ERROR. > >>>>>>True, however I still see a difference between FAILED and WARNING. > >>>>>>For instance, as an example: a FAILED RAID is different than a > >>>>>>RAID with a WARNING. > >>>>>For that level of detail, the ability to provide additional output > >>>>>seems > >>>>>like the appropriate solution. > >>>>Yes, true, but you'd still want to show something (I would think) in > >>>>the [ ]'s to keep it consistent. > >>>My feeling is that anything short of complete success should report > >>>WARNING and a message unless it actually totally failed in which case > >>>FAILED or ERROR (I slightly perfer ERROR) should be used. > >>> > >>>-- Brooks > >> > >>What situations are we determining get flagged as ERROR versus FAILED? > >>Is FAILED considered to be 'I was able to run the command, but it > >>returned an error code', versus ERROR being 'I could not even run the > >>command!' like bad path, file not found, etc... > >> > >>This point still kind of confuses me (and needs to be well defined). I > >>am an advocate of having three distinct messages: OK, SKIPPED, ERROR. > >>And not even bothering with the different types of ERROR/FAILED other > >>than having extra reporting output. > > > >I'm ok with just OK, SKIPPED, ERROR.. If there's ever a need for more, > >it's easy to add it. > > > >Eric > > > > > > > > > Is this still planned to make it into -CURRENT? > > Thanks, > Eric > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Eric Anderson Sr. Systems Administrator Centaur Technology > Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I've been working on it in my spare time. I am investigating some avenues regarding status reporting from the rc scripts to the console. Also been slow getting some hardware together to put cokane.org back up and online. Mostly real-life just got in the way of freebsd for a little while. -- coleman kane _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
