RFC - bootscript error reporting
jeremy at linuxfromscratch.org
Thu Jan 29 00:47:19 PST 2004
On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 15:11, James Robertson wrote:
> I really like this. As others have posted, not all errors are the same.
> We would need to come up with some kind of system to trap errors from
> the different programs that are called within boot scritps. Or if that
> is too hard, then at least some system to agree on a "criticality" of
> certain Sxx scripts. Kxx scritps are important, but not as critical IMO
> as Sxx scripts when entering a certain rc level.
> Also, there needs to be a mechanism in place (in the bootscritps) to
> notify the administrator when he/she came back to the console that a
> reboot occured at such-and-such a date and time and what the result of
> any messages were. This is especially important for the ones that get a
> timeout value and move on. Can we use mail for that? I don't know, I
> am not _that_ smart with Linux yet.
My thought was actually much simpler, but it can only be done after the
system is in a read/write mode. Have the bootscripts, as part of the
boot process, write to /var/log/bootscripts.log, any failures or
warnings that come about as part of the boot process.
Actually, now that I think about it...someone with more knowledge than
me answer this - would it be possible to have a fifo device (via mkfifo)
set up someplace where we could write messages to prior to the
filesystem being mounted in r/w mode, then at S99log, cat the contents
to that fifo into a log file?
> On the simple pause idea, the time to pause needs to be easily
> changeable in a /etc/sysconfig file of some kind. Everyone will have a
> different opinion as to how long they want the boot process to pause
> before continuing.
Good idea - will definately file that one away for future reference!
> I am also not sure that LFS needs to be concerned with headless or
> non-administrator-local machines. I would love it in my production
> environment, but most of our readers reboot at the console. The issues
> Jeremy brought up are more about that. The easiest thing is simply to
> fix the scritps to support the enter key or change the text to say CRTL-J.
> I am only throwing this out for thought. I actually would love to see
> Jeremy's idea put into the scripts.
While in a lot of ways, I agree, James, there are a number of people who
are actually using LFS-based systems in a production enviornment. I
know that I myself have gotten bit by this one on a number of occasions,
and it's very annoying when you have to drive 45 minutes to the
datacenter, or drag a NOC technician away from their TV long enough to
punch the reset button. One of the key advantages to Linux (at least
for me) is the ability to remotely administer the machine, and making
this change to LFS actually makes that possible. I can see now we could
actually integrate an option like this into your previous request, like
if [$PAUSE_DURATION == 0]
More information about the lfs-dev