sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Damien Mascord <tusker AT tusker.org>
- To: Seth Woolley <seth AT tautology.org>
- Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes
- Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 09:51:06 +0800
Hi Seth (et al),
One way of doing it would be to have a queue type system, so you have a "hashtable" of sorts (or just a multi dimensional array), which you populate with the status events as they come in. (I'm not a bash programmer, so I'm not sure how easy this would be).
Once you have this status table, you could either print this at intervals, or have some kind of IPC event model which when a status event is populated into the table, it would print that status out.
Something like:
Samba [STARTING]
.
SSH [STARTING]
.
Samba [ OK ]
.
.
.
SSH [ FAIL ]
To make sure things don't get printed over each other, perhaps you can have a "locking" mechinism, ie...
echo() {
if [lock -eq "true" ] {
# somehow wait
}
echo $1
}
(As you can see I don't know my bash well enough).
Another possible way would be to use some kind of ncurses programming, so that you can play around with the screen co-ordinates a bit more cleanly... so maybe have a list of services currently in action... and then pop them off the screen as they start successfully.... ie:
To start with:
SSH [STARTING]
SAMBA [STARTING]
OTHER [ FAIL]
And after a while show something like
SSH [ OK ]
SAMBA [STARTING]
OTHER [ FAIL ]
After a delay period, remove the services that start succesfully to remove the clutter.
Let me know how crazy you think these ideas are, or whatever :)
Damien
Seth Woolley wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I hope it wasn't moved into test yet. Oh well, do this to fix:
smgl_functions
89a90
export -f logger_func132a134
export -f print_status
or wait for the next tarballing.
the reason why it prints success four times is because the init script was
buggy to begin with. The new format only shows you how buggy the old
script is because it doesn't line-up-print-status four times in a row
which is unneeded status printing. I'm open to suggestions for a better
way to print paralleled status. In parallel init, you can't just print
[ OK ] on the same line due to the fact that you don't know what the OK
was for if things can run in parallel.
I suppose I could check for sequential init, but since the move up print
status is also printing anyways, I don't see how it can be faster.
Yes, prepending with 'init.d: ' may be overkill, so I removed that now,
and scripts have color anyways, so you should know if it came from init.d.
Now, it might be slower because of the system logger code (that was in
there before though), but for good measure, I made it optional, so there's
no fork needed for that.
Perhaps success should be silent and only failures should be printed (but
you wouldn't know if one script hung since you didn't not see success), or
I could have it remember the last line printed for each script and have
status go up the number of lines needed, print [ OK ] on the right
side of it, then go back down a number of lines, but I would think that
might be slower, even if it looks pretty.
Another alternative is to have it print [ alsa: OK ] on the right
side. The way I did it was quite simple, I thought, even though one may
think it's not as pretty.
The major gotcha so far is that echo used for anything other than printing
to the screen needs to be "builtin echo" in init scripts since it occurs
much more often as sent to the screen than as piped through another
binary. When running sub-scripts, also, if one doesn't want the echo
override to inherit, one needs to "(unset -f echo; subscript)" instead of
running the subscript directly.
Almost all standard init scripts work fine with it though.
Hope that helps.
Seth
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Jeremy Kolb wrote:
So my xscreensaver decided to lock up my system (think it's the nvidia
drivers), and so I had to reboot. When I did, I noticed that the output
to the init stuff had changed. While I understand why the change was
made it looks kind of ugly to me. Also, it seems like everything takes
longer to load because more text is placed on the screen, and somethings
are displayed twice (samba has a "success" a total of four times) and
gdm comes up with about twenty of these: "line 10: printstatus not
found" or something like that.
I understand that this was changed so that we could have services start
in parallel, but is there anyway we could have the old behavior stay for
the sequential init? Or modify what we have now as it's a little slower
and not as pretty?
I'm just trying to think this through and I respect the work that's gone
into this (don't take this the wrong way!).
Jeremy
_______________________________________________
SM-Discuss mailing list
SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
- --
Seth Alan Woolley <seth at tautology.org>, SPAM/UCE is unauthorized
Key id 7BEACC7D = 2978 0BD1 BA48 B671 C1EB 93F7 EDF4 3CDF 7BEA CC7D
Full Key at seth.tautology.org and pgp.mit.edu. info: www.gnupg.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQE/hIiP7fQ833vqzH0RAmBZAJ99vnkiqu/gb8xOb2ZuZdXyjFpkvQCfSLvj
R8GmNhxLxaRM+/umEBOGTZc=
=DMW8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
SM-Discuss mailing list
SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
-
[SM-Discuss] init woes,
Jeremy Kolb, 10/08/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Seth Woolley, 10/08/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Damien Mascord, 10/08/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Paul Mahon, 10/08/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Robert Helgesson, 10/09/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Paul Mahon, 10/09/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Robert Helgesson, 10/09/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes, Paul Mahon, 10/09/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes, Seth Woolley, 10/09/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes, Paul Mahon, 10/09/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes, Seth Woolley, 10/09/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes, Paul Mahon, 10/09/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes, Seth Woolley, 10/09/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Robert Helgesson, 10/09/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Paul Mahon, 10/09/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Robert Helgesson, 10/09/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Paul Mahon, 10/08/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Damien Mascord, 10/08/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] init woes,
Seth Woolley, 10/08/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.