One daemon not starting in /etc/rc.local

[Polytropon]

On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 14:19:57 +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote:
> In /etc/rc.local I have:
> 
> # REQUIRE: networking DAEMON FILESYSTEMS devfs
> # PROVIDE: p0f recover-backup count-stats

Does rc.local pay attention to this kind of comments?
It was my impression that both rc.local and rc.shutdown.local
are "dumb" and determined by execution time...

I tend to associate the REQUIRE and PROVIDE keywords
with the rc ordering mechanism which rc.d/ style files
use so they can be run the correct order. As I mentioned,
rc.local's runtime is determined by /etc/rc itself.

>From "man rc.local":

     [...] The rc.local script contains com-
     mands which are pertinent only to a specific site.  Typically, the
     /usr/local/etc/rc.d/ mechanism is used instead of rc.local these days but
     if you want to use rc.local, it is still supported.  In this case, it
     should source /etc/rc.conf and contain additional custom startup code for
     your system.  The best way to handle rc.local, however, is to separate it
     out into rc.d/ style scripts and place them under /usr/local/etc/rc.d/.

So if you can, create and rc.d/ style script and put it
into /usr/local/etc/rc.d/ including the keywords mentioned
above.



> echo iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
> 
> # start the OS fingerprint analyzer
> # -l means on line per record!
> /usr/local/bin/p0f -i vmx0  'tcp dst port 25' 2>&1|/usr/local/bin/p0f-analyzer.pl 2345 &
> 
> echo iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
> 
> 
> At boot I see the 2 lines of iii but p0f is not started.
> 
> If I copy/paste in sheel the line /usr/local/bin/p0f etc. it starts,
> prints the start-up message and runs happilly.

Is the "non-use" of spaces in the segment "2>&1|/usr/local/bin/p0f"
significant? Is the shell where you're interactively executing the
command different from the shell that runs rc.local (/bin/sh)?



> There must be a trivial error, but I can't see it, so any help will be
> greatly appreciated.

Except what might be pure form, I don't see any errors, so the
reason for the different behaviour might be in the environment...



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...