On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 01:57:52PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 17 July 2014 13:54, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt_at_freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 10:21:17PM +0200, Andreas Nilsson wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Navdeep Parhar <nparhar_at_gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > On 07/17/14 13:12, Adrian Chadd wrote: > >> > > On 17 July 2014 13:03, Alberto Mijares <amijaresp_at_gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian_at_freebsd.org> > >> > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi! > >> > >>> > >> > >>> 3) The binary packages need to work out of the box > >> > >>> 4) .. which means, when you do things like pkg install apache, it > >> > >>> can't just be installed and not be enabled, because that's a bit of a > >> > >>> problem; > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> No. Please NEVER do that! The user must be able to edit the files and > >> > >> start the service by himself. > >> > > > >> > > Cool, so what's the single line command needed to type in to start a > >> > > given package service? > >> > > >> > Aren't sysrc(8) and service(8) for this kind of stuff? > >> > > >> > >> They sure are. > >> > >> Well, pkg install $service ; sysrc ${service}_enable="YES" would do. > >> Although some services have different names than the packge, which is sort > >> of annoying. > > > > Maybe service needs to be extended (seriously sysrc ${service}_enable="YES" is > > not user friendly) we have service -l that list the services, maybe a service > > ${service} on that create /etc/rc.conf.d/${service} with ${service}_enable="YES" > > in it and service ${service} off to remove it > > > > maybe service -l could also be extended to show the current status (maybe with a > > -v switch) > > > > but for sure having the service off by default is a good idea :) > > Yeah, maybe having it populate an entry of service_enable="NO" for now . then you need to extend rcng to support /usr/local/etc/rc.conf.d so the packages can install them without touching base :) and we will need to wait for all supported FreeBSD version to have the said modification) > > It's even more unclear-ish - it's not obvious which options control > services and which ones are configuration things. We don't call it > service_<xxx>_enable, right? > imho this is obvious <xxx>_enable == control service. regards, Bapt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:50 UTC