RFC - bootscript error reporting

Nathan Coulson conathan at conet.dyndns.org
Mon Jan 26 22:36:41 PST 2004


> Jeremy,
>
> this is exactly what I have been doing, replacing the read with a
> echo "Waiting 5 seconds before continuing..."
> sleep 5
>
>
> But I would suggest a different approach since we're discussing.  If
> fixing,
> let's make it right.
>
> How about we actually pass the return value to print_error_msg inside rc,
> and
> maybe the script that rc was processing when the error occured.  We can
> assign different levels of importance to each script.  Something like
> IMPORTANCE={0-2} where 0 is non-crucial, don't even report it, 1 is
> important, report but continue and 2 critical, stop.   Maybe also a 3 that
> is
> fatal, shutdown and write a file to / something like /fatal so that if a
> reboot is attempted the first thing rc does is check if /fatal is present
> and
> refuse to continue.  I'm thinking a corrupted fs would warrant such an
> action.
>
> So then, back to print_error_msg, we pass to it the name of the script and
> the
> return value and we decide based on the script's importance level what to
> do.
>
> Just some crazy ideas, I know but hey, you asked :-)
>
> So yes, this is a good thing (tm) that we're discussing bootscripts.
>
> Oh, and since we are discussing, where do we stand on  static vs dhcp?  I
> remember there was a long thread, but at some point I got distracted and
> didn't see the end of it.  If there's an interest we should address this
> as
> well and I can offer my approach.  I'm sure there'll be a better one.

I actually made a system up earlier, which introduces a new variable to
ifconfig.eth0.  SERVICE=static.  the ifup will then try to run
/etc/sysconfig/network-devices/services/$SERVICE.  [well, path might be a
bit off what was in my code, I dont recall].

that way, we can just make SERVICE=dhcpcd, or something.  [easy enough
script that BLFS can make].

What was your idea?

> IvanK.
>
> On Tuesday 27 January 2004 06:17 pm, Jeremy Utley wrote:
>> As the new co-maintainer of the lfs-bootscripts package, I'd like to get
>> the community's input on what I feel is a fairly serious problem with
>> the LFS-bootscripts - that is the hanging of the bootscripts when an
>> error is encountered.  We've all seen it before:
>>
>> You should not be seeing this message! blah blah
>>
>> Press Enter to continue.
>>
>> This poses 2 problems - first, if the machine is unattended, this will
>> hang the reboot process.  Second, previous reports list that
>> occasionally hitting the enter key doesn't do the RightThing (TM) with
>> regard to this.  I propose to make the default bootscripts replace this
>> with a pause of a reasonable duration (5-10 secs), and then continue on
>> with the process.  The worst case if this is done that *I* personally
>> can think of is that some filesystems may not be properly unmounted on
>> the reboot, and might need to be fscked after the reboot.  It still,
>> however, gives the user who's watching the bootscripts proceed to see
>> the error that occured, and look into the problem when the system comes
>> back up.
>>
>> Anyone see any major flaws with doing this?
>>
>> -J-
>
> --
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list