On Sat, 10 Jun 2023 at 20:08, Martin Husemann <mar...@duskware.de> wrote: > I don't like this commit, it mixes: > > - several text improvements (good!) > - one unrelated cosmetic change (rely on all rc.d scripts being installed > with x bit, so drop the "sh" from the manual invocation)
Calling the rc.d script directly is how we teach people to do it in the NetBSD Guide: https://www.netbsd.org/docs/guide/en/chap-rc.html#chap-rc-scripts The usage message that rc.d scripts produce also shows executing them directly: # service sshd check /etc/rc.d/sshd: unknown directive 'check'. Usage: /etc/rc.d/sshd [fast|force|one](start stop restart rcvar keygen reload status poll) I think adopting a single convention across the board would be least confusing for users. Personally I like calling rc.d scripts using service(8) as it makes an effort to run the rc.d script as close as possible to how it is run from rc(8). I find setting the current working directory to / is especially prudent and noteworthy. However, it would appear that service(8) has a bug where it also relies on executing the rc.d script directly. In practise it would be rare to run into it, though, as we do seem to install rc.d scripts with all the execute bits set. The error service(8) outputs when no execute bits are set is "sshd does not exist in /etc/rc.d," which can be perplexing when /etc/rc.d/sshd clearly does exist. > - one unrelated and IMO unneded change (check if kern.entropy.needed > exists, only usefull for older branches) My thinking here is that it makes it simpler to keep the script in sync between branches. (I have not checked, but I guess the sysctl does not depend on kernel configuration then.) Kind regards, + Kimmo
