On Aug 12, 2008, at 5:14 AM, Jonathan McKeown wrote:
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 14:03:30 Adrian Penisoara wrote:
While we're at it, I wish we could leverage the posibility for the
admin to manually start the service at the CLI, no matter whether the
service has been enabled or not -- that is th
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 1:40 AM, Vincent Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jonathan McKeown wrote:
>> On Tuesday 12 August 2008 17:51:32 Mike Meyer wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:10:22 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara"
>>> Ok, given that you 1) want to have both " this service if it's
>>> part of
Quoting "Kurt J. Lidl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (from Thu, 7 Aug 2008 16:20:42
-0400):
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 07:02:30PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2008-Aug-06 19:14:51 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In Solaris 10 the Services Management Facility (SMF) was introduced.
The main purpose of
Jonathan McKeown wrote:
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 17:51:32 Mike Meyer wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:10:22 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Umm, I have used Gentoo and I do not remember having to use
"forcestart" at the command line...
Ok, given that you 1)
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 17:51:32 Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:10:22 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> > Umm, I have used Gentoo and I do not remember having to use
> > "forcestart" at the command line...
>
> Ok, given that you 1) want to have both " this
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Mike Meyer wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:10:22 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While we're at it, I wish we could leverage the posibility for the
admin to manually start the service at the CLI, no matter
whether the
service has been enabled or not
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:10:22 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While we're at it, I wish we could leverage the posibility for the
> admin to manually start the service at the CLI, no matter whether the
> service has been enabled or not -- that is the "_enable" ke
Mike Meyer wrote:
On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:10:22 +0200 "Adrian Penisoara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While we're at it, I wish we could leverage the posibility for the
admin to manually start the service at the CLI, no matter whether the
service has been enabled or not -- that is the "_enabl
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Stefan Lambrev
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm not sure where is that remark headed to. And I don't think
>> (re)packaging a business-centric version would harm -- please correct
>> me if I'm wrong.
>>
>
> The problem with "enterprise" is that they ship the
Adrian Penisoara wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Stefan Lambrev
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First let me reiterate a few things. I started in FreeBSD and it will
always be my first love. Second, keep in mind that Solaris is a
commercial
product and must be viewed as such.
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Stefan Lambrev
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> First let me reiterate a few things. I started in FreeBSD and it will
>>> always be my first love. Second, keep in mind that Solaris is a
>>> commercial
>>> product and must be viewed as such.
>>>
>>
>> Good po
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 14:03:30 Adrian Penisoara wrote:
> While we're at it, I wish we could leverage the posibility for the
> admin to manually start the service at the CLI, no matter whether the
> service has been enabled or not -- that is the "_enable" keyword
> should have effect only in th
Adrian Penisoara wrote:
Hi,
I'm a bit late to jump on board, but since I'm interested in the
subject and previously given some thinking, here are my thoughts.
And perhaps the freebsd-rc list is better suited.
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 1:20 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am surprised b
Adrian Penisoara wrote:
I also agree that it would be good for the rc.d scripts to
(re)configure themselves, since they are the ones who really know
what's best for them.
While we're at it, I wish we could leverage the posibility for the
admin to manually start the service at the CLI, no mat
Hi,
I'm a bit late to jump on board, but since I'm interested in the
subject and previously given some thinking, here are my thoughts.
And perhaps the freebsd-rc list is better suited.
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 1:20 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am surprised by the overwhelming response th
> On Behalf Of Wilkinson, Alex
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 6:34 AM
> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Idea for FreeBSD
>
>
> 0n Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 07:14:51PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
> >I would like to submit the idea of impl
On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 09:57:07AM +0100, Vincent Hoffman wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 11:25:39AM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
> >> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 09:15:00 +0300 Alex Kozlov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> [1]:
> >>> $cat /usr/local/bin/service
> >> Basically what I had in mind, but it can b
On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 12:19:54PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Alex Kozlov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Matthew Seaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > [...] XML itself is too general-purpose: it has too much baggage
> > > designed for its primary function of facilitating interoperatio
Alex Kozlov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Matthew Seaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > [...] XML itself is too general-purpose: it has too much baggage
> > designed for its primary function of facilitating interoperation
> > between diverse systems in different zones of control, none of which
>
Alex Kozlov wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 11:25:39AM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 09:15:00 +0300 Alex Kozlov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[1]:
$cat /usr/local/bin/service
Basically what I had in mind, but it can be made more portable across
FreeBSD configurations.
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 11:25:39AM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 09:15:00 +0300 Alex Kozlov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [1]:
> > $cat /usr/local/bin/service
>
> Basically what I had in mind, but it can be made more portable across
> FreeBSD configurations.
>
[...]
>
> And here
I am surprised by the overwhelming response that this thread has acquired.
I have spent the majority of the day reading all the responses that
everyone has put forward. I would like to clear a few things up, comment
on others, and suggest some solutions to a lot of good points that
everyone has mad
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 07:02:30PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2008-Aug-06 19:14:51 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > In Solaris 10 the Services Management Facility (SMF) was introduced.
>
> The main purpose of SMF appears to be to drum up business for Sun's
> training courses by radically
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 11:16:36PM -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote:
> >The Solaris smf tools provide some nice facilities: one is single
> >interface to start, stop, check and restart all the services on a
> >system. We pretty much have that ...
> >The other is a single interface to enable, disable and q
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 11:29:49AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 07:14:51PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> To who it may concern,
> >>
> >>I am A FreeBSD administrator as well as a Solaris Administrator. I use
> >> BSD at home but Solari
On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 23:16:36 -0700 Tim Kientzle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The Solaris smf tools provide some nice facilities: one is single
> > interface to start, stop, check and restart all the services on a
> > system. We pretty much have that ...
> >
> > The other is a single interface t
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 09:15:00 +0300 Alex Kozlov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [1]:
> $cat /usr/local/bin/service
Basically what I had in mind, but it can be made more portable across
FreeBSD configurations.
> #!/bin/sh
>
> name=$1
> cmd=$2
>
> . /etc/rc.subr
> if [ -z "${name}" -o -z "${cmd}" ]
>
On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So you take each line from inetd.conf (literally) and wrap it in
> > several KB of XML. This definitely adds to bloat and doesn't even
> > obey the spirit of XML (since the content of each inetd.conf ent
Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So you take each line from inetd.conf (literally) and wrap it in
> several KB of XML. This definitely adds to bloat and doesn't even
> obey the spirit of XML (since the content of each inetd.conf entry
> remains opaque).
s/inetd/rc/g
I completely agree
On 2008-Aug-06 19:14:51 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In Solaris 10 the Services Management Facility (SMF) was introduced.
The main purpose of SMF appears to be to drum up business for Sun's
training courses by radically changing Sol10 Administration for little
benefit.
>Basically what it d
"Michael B Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I did not mean to say that the scripts themselves were decrepit. I
> mean the whole Unix runlevel rc.d apparatus in general is decrepit.
FreeBSD doesn't have runlevels. Solaris does. You don't like
runlevels, but you want FreeBSD to be more like So
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 07:14:51PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To who it may concern,
I am A FreeBSD administrator as well as a Solaris Administrator. I use
BSD at home but Solaris at work. I love both OS's but I would like to
increase the administrative capability
Am 07.08.2008 um 08:31 schrieb Michael B Allen:
mean the whole Unix runlevel rc.d apparatus in general is decrepit.
Hi, Jordan! 8-)
There should be a library to install, start, stop, restart, uninstall,
disable, enable, change order of services and also change the
runlevel. And then there sh
I wonder opinions on more general question:
Does somebody believe in necessity of separate infrastructure for
daemons(services)?
As for me i very dislike unclean of "what where located". Some
configuration lie in /etc, some in /usr/local/etc, some in
/usr/local/program_name. In addition there is
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 07:14:51PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> To who it may concern,
>
>I am A FreeBSD administrator as well as a Solaris Administrator. I use
> BSD at home but Solaris at work. I love both OS's but I would like to
> increase the administrative capability of FreeBSD.
>
On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 01:06:38AM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
>On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 22:34:51 "Michael B Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But of course the format of data in a database is largely irrelevant.
> > You could implement the same thing with dbm files or a more forgiving
> > text format.
The Solaris smf tools provide some nice facilities: one is single
interface to start, stop, check and restart all the services on a
system. We pretty much have that ...
The other is a single interface to enable, disable and query the
status of all the services. All we really have is the last one.
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 1:06 AM, Mike Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 22:34:51 -0400
> "Michael B Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As for getting rid of rc.d scripts, yes they're decrepit and I would
>> love to see them go but they're simple and third party software may
>>
On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 22:34:51 -0400
"Michael B Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:14 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > To who it may concern,
> >
> > I am A FreeBSD administrator as well as a Solaris Administrator. I use
> > BSD at home but Solaris at work. I love both
0n Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 07:14:51PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I would like to submit the idea of implementing a similar environment
>into FreeBSD. After looking through the developers links and googling I
>found no project for FreeBSD that implemented anything similar to thi
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:14 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> To who it may concern,
>>
>> I am A FreeBSD administrator as well as a Solaris Administrator.
>> I use
>> BSD at home but Solaris at work. I love both OS's but I would like
>> to
>> increase the administrative capability of FreeBSD
On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:14 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To who it may concern,
>
> I am A FreeBSD administrator as well as a Solaris Administrator. I use
> BSD at home but Solaris at work. I love both OS's but I would like to
> increase the administrative capability of FreeBSD.
>
> In Sol
To who it may concern,
I am A FreeBSD administrator as well as a Solaris Administrator. I use
BSD at home but Solaris at work. I love both OS's but I would like to
increase the administrative capability of FreeBSD.
In Solaris 10 the Services Management Facility (SMF) was introduced.
Basical
43 matches
Mail list logo
