ports/162049: The Ports tree lacks a framework to restart services

[Chip Camden]

Quoth Scott Lambert on Thursday, 27 October 2011:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:15:00AM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> > 
> > As crees@ suggested, I'm sending an email to ports@ about this.
> > 
> > What really bothers me when I use the FreeBSD Ports tree on one of my
> > systems, is that the behaviour of dealing with services is quite
> > inconsistent. 
> > 
> > My question is whether anyone has ever attempted to improve the
> > integration with rc-scripts? In the PR I propose something along these
> > lines:
> > 
> > 	We know exactly which ports install rc scripts (USE_RC_SUBR).
> > 	Why not run `/usr/local/etc/rc.d/${FOO} status' and
> > 	`/usr/local/etc/rc.d/${FOO} stop' prior to installation. Based
> > 	on the return value of the first, we can run
> > 	`/usr/local/etc/rc.d/${FOO} start' after installation.
> 
> If all of that is contingent upon a boolean knob the admin can set,
> something like NO_RESTART_SERVICES, I suspect everyone could get
> what they want and the bikeshed would be limitted to what the default
> for that boolean should be.
> 
> The people who don't want the services restarted automagically can
> set it and, once things use the new ports framewoork properly, not
> have to worry about suprises.  The people who want everything to
> restarted as soon as possible can set the knob the other way.  
> 
> It could help keep our less sophisticated users from continuing to
> run vulerable versions of software after they think they have done
> what is needed to get the patched software.  The sophisticated users
> would still be free to choose which foot to shoot.
> 
> A side effect might, eventually, be to encourage ports maintainers
> to analyse their ported software for incompatible config changes
> so that they can programatically halt the install and output a
> warning message before attempting to stop the old daemon then
> upgrading while a likely un-usable config is in place.
> 
> I see it as win, win, if there is a knob.
> 
> I do not like either option without a knob, depending on the box
> we are talking about.
> 

+1 for this idea.

+10 for "The sophisticated users would still be free to choose which foot
to shoot."

-- 
.O. | Sterling (Chip) Camden      | http://camdensoftware.com
..O | sterling at camdensoftware.com | http://chipsquips.com
OOO | 2048R/D6DBAF91              | http://chipstips.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20111027/fbf47ed7/attachment.pgp