svn commit: r293227 - head/etc

[Devin Teske]

> On Jan 5, 2016, at 4:27 PM, Ian Lepore <ian at freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 2016-01-05 at 19:18 -0500, Allan Jude wrote:
>> On 2016-01-05 19:16, Devin Teske wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Jan 5, 2016, at 4:00 PM, Ian Lepore <ian at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, 2016-01-05 at 21:20 +0000, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>>> Author: imp
>>>>> Date: Tue Jan  5 21:20:47 2016
>>>>> New Revision: 293227
>>>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/293227
>>>>> 
>>>>> Log:
>>>>>  Use the more proper -f. Leave /bin/rm in place since that's
>>>>> what
>>>>>  other rc scripts have, though it isn't strictly necessary.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Modified:
>>>>>  head/etc/rc
>>>>> 
>>>>> Modified: head/etc/rc
>>>>> ===============================================================
>>>>> ======
>>>>> =========
>>>>> --- head/etc/rc	Tue Jan  5 21:20:46 2016	(r293226
>>>>> )
>>>>> +++ head/etc/rc	Tue Jan  5 21:20:47 2016	(r293227
>>>>> )
>>>>> @@ -132,9 +132,9 @@ done
>>>>> # Remove the firstboot sentinel, and reboot if it was
>>>>> requested.
>>>>> if [ -e ${firstboot_sentinel} ]; then
>>>>> 	[ ${root_rw_mount} = "yes" ] || mount -uw /
>>>>> -	/bin/rm ${firstboot_sentinel}
>>>>> +	/bin/rm -f ${firstboot_sentinel}
>>>>> 	if [ -e ${firstboot_sentinel}-reboot ]; then
>>>>> -		/bin/rm ${firstboot_sentinel}-reboot
>>>>> +		/bin/rm -f ${firstboot_sentinel}-reboot
>>>>> 		[ ${root_rw_mount} = "yes" ] || mount -ur /
>>>>> 		kill -INT 1
>>>>> 	fi
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Using rm -f to suppress an error message seems like a bad idea
>>>> here --
>>>> if the sentinel file can't be removed that implies it's going to
>>>> do
>>>> firstboot behavior every time it boots, and that's the sort of
>>>> error
>>>> that should be in-your-face.  Especially on the reboot one
>>>> because
>>>> you're going to be stuck in a reboot loop with no error message.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Leaving off -f so that the user gets prompted isn't quite as
>>> helpful
>>> as, say, using -f but then testing to make sure the file is really
>>> gone
>>> (if it still exists after a silent "rm -f", put up an informative
>>> warning
>>> instead of asking the user if they would like to delete it).
>>> 
>>> The end-result of having something thrown in your face seems
>>> desirable. Having a prompt that asks you if you'd like to delete it
>>> (even if there is an error immediately above it explaining it could
>>> not be deleted) seems nonsensical.
>>> 
>> 
>> More specifically, firstboot is most likely run in situations where
>> no 
>> one will be at the console, so an interactive prompt stopping the
>> system 
>> from coming up is bad.
>> 
> 
> I couldn't possibly disagree more.  If you're not paying attention to
> what happens the first time you boot a freshly installed system, you
> deserve whatever happens to you.

What if you are in New York and the server is alone in Siberia?

... Got SSH? (not if your boot stopped, you don't)
-- 
Devin