From suse@tlinx.org Thu Jan 24 08:43:38 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:42:51 -0800
Message-ID: <5100F40B.8050909@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3396778804498983649=="

--===============3396778804498983649==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


I'm constantly seeing system scripts starting with #!/bin/sh which
tells BASH to run in POSIX conformance mode, yet occasionally,
more or less randomly, I'll see "BASHism's" in the script.

Case in point: the cron job for logrotate references
the Array PIPESTATUS to get at the exit value of log rotate.

Arrays and PIPESTATUS never used to be part of POSIX.

Also a quick grep turns up
startup scripts, using Bash's '[['
syntax, such as:

boot.localfs
boot.kdump
dhcpd
dhcpd6
kbd
dictd
cifs
monit
mysql
named
zfs-fuse

Shouldn't these scripts be invoked as #!/bin/bash?

Maybe some of them run because they are invoked
as bash -c <script>, but it seems problematic to
state that it is to be used with #!/bin/sh at the top
of a script but be using "Bashism's" in the script.

On my own system, I change the line at the top to say #!/bin/bash
if the script uses Bash syntax.  Maybe that should become the standard
prefix if system scripts are going to be using Bash syntax?






-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============3396778804498983649==--


From mail@bernhard-voelker.de Thu Jan 24 08:53:39 2013
From: Bernhard Voelker <mail@bernhard-voelker.de>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:52:54 +0100
Message-ID: <5100F666.3080600@bernhard-voelker.de>
In-Reply-To: <5100F40B.8050909@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2749596001072700165=="

--===============2749596001072700165==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 01/24/2013 09:42 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
> 
> I'm constantly seeing system scripts starting with #!/bin/sh which
> tells BASH to run in POSIX conformance mode, yet occasionally,
> more or less randomly, I'll see "BASHism's" in the script.

Wow, not bad (on a 12.1 system):

  $ find /etc/init.d -maxdepth 1 -mindepth 1 -type f | \
  xargs checkbashisms 2>&1 | wc -l
  400

Have a nice day,
Berny
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============2749596001072700165==--


From suse@tlinx.org Thu Jan 24 09:22:36 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 01:21:46 -0800
Message-ID: <5100FD2A.8090708@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <5100F666.3080600@bernhard-voelker.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9084107027555973151=="

--===============9084107027555973151==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 01/24/2013 09:42 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>> I'm constantly seeing system scripts starting with #!/bin/sh which
>> tells BASH to run in POSIX conformance mode, yet occasionally,
>> more or less randomly, I'll see "BASHism's" in the script.
> 
> Wow, not bad (on a 12.1 system):
> 
>   $ find /etc/init.d -maxdepth 1 -mindepth 1 -type f | \
>   xargs checkbashisms 2>&1 | wc -l
>   400
> 
> Have a nice day,
> Berny

----
So you are saying it's no problem?  whatever.

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============9084107027555973151==--


From werner@suse.de Thu Jan 24 09:33:00 2013
From: "Dr. Werner Fink" <werner@suse.de>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:32:57 +0100
Message-ID: <20130124093257.GA19718@boole.suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <5100F40B.8050909@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8433569620128642078=="

--===============8433569620128642078==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:42:51AM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote:
> 
> I'm constantly seeing system scripts starting with #!/bin/sh which
> tells BASH to run in POSIX conformance mode, yet occasionally,
> more or less randomly, I'll see "BASHism's" in the script.
> 
> Case in point: the cron job for logrotate references
> the Array PIPESTATUS to get at the exit value of log rotate.

True.

> Arrays and PIPESTATUS never used to be part of POSIX.

True.

> Also a quick grep turns up
> startup scripts, using Bash's '[['
> syntax, such as:

AFAIK the `[[ ... ]]' is known in latest POSIX, see e.g.

      http://manuals.ts.fujitsu.com/file/8867/posix_k.pdf

on page 44 and page 57ff.  And not only the bash does it
use but also the ksh, IMHO most user should use this
for any Conditional Expression instead of the `test ...' or
the '[ ... ]' builtin to be sure not run into trouble if
regular experssions are used  ;)

Also the `let ...' builtin ... or its equivalent `(( ... ))'
for integer arithmetic's are well known, see page 448ff.

> 
> boot.localfs
> boot.kdump
> dhcpd
> dhcpd6
> kbd
> dictd
> cifs
> monit
> mysql
> named
> zfs-fuse
> 
> Shouldn't these scripts be invoked as #!/bin/bash?
> 
> Maybe some of them run because they are invoked
> as bash -c <script>, but it seems problematic to
> state that it is to be used with #!/bin/sh at the top
> of a script but be using "Bashism's" in the script.
> 
> On my own system, I change the line at the top to say #!/bin/bash
> if the script uses Bash syntax.  Maybe that should become the standard
> prefix if system scripts are going to be using Bash syntax?
> 

   Werner

-- 
  "Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
          a peeing section in a swimming pool." -- Edward Burr
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============8433569620128642078==--


From mail@bernhard-voelker.de Thu Jan 24 09:47:58 2013
From: Bernhard Voelker <mail@bernhard-voelker.de>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 10:47:15 +0100
Message-ID: <51010323.5050706@bernhard-voelker.de>
In-Reply-To: <5100FD2A.8090708@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5927800600866781046=="

--===============5927800600866781046==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 01/24/2013 10:21 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
> So you are saying it's no problem?  whatever.

Reading my own mail, I'd say that I wrote that
I was astonished to find so many bashisms in
my own /etc/init.d/, not more.
And as such, just simply demonstrating a few
numbers for your statement. Without appraisal.

Have a nice day,
Berny
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============5927800600866781046==--


From opensuse@antonaylward.com Thu Jan 24 12:52:32 2013
From: Anton Aylward <opensuse@antonaylward.com>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 07:51:48 -0500
Message-ID: <51012E64.9000201@antonaylward.com>
In-Reply-To: <5100F40B.8050909@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3391582826320388968=="

--===============3391582826320388968==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Linda Walsh said the following on 01/24/2013 03:42 AM:
> 
> [...]
> 
> On my own system, I change the line at the top to say #!/bin/bash
> if the script uses Bash syntax.  Maybe that should become the standard
> prefix if system scripts are going to be using Bash syntax?

If you think this is a bug/defect then report it as such.

-- 
"Don't get complacent. Push yourself out of your comfort zone and set
higher standards of achievement for yourself. Once you've achieved a
standard of excellence, never let it rest--push yourself even higher."
-- Dave Anderson
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============3391582826320388968==--


From mhrusecky@suse.cz Thu Jan 24 13:09:10 2013
From: Michal Hrusecky <mhrusecky@suse.cz>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 14:09:03 +0100
Message-ID: <20130124130903.GD5256@misibook.ipv6.hrusecky.net>
In-Reply-To: <5100F40B.8050909@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8474737379584957512=="

--===============8474737379584957512==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Linda Walsh -  0:42 24.01.13 wrote:
> 
> ...
>
> Also a quick grep turns up
> startup scripts, using Bash's '[['
> syntax, such as:
> 
> boot.localfs
> boot.kdump
> dhcpd
> dhcpd6
> kbd
> dictd
> cifs
> monit
> mysql

mysql uses #!/bin/bash

-- 
Michal HRUSECKY                                    SUSE LINUX, s.r.o
openSUSE Team                                     Lihovarska 1060/12
PGP 0xFED656F6                                         19000 Praha 9
mhrusecky[at]suse.cz                                  Czech Republic
http://michal.hrusecky.net                        http://www.suse.cz
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============8474737379584957512==--


From suse-list3@bout-tyme.net Thu Jan 24 17:02:55 2013
From: Ken Schneider - openSUSE <suse-list3@bout-tyme.net>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:02:09 -0500
Message-ID: <51016911.3040708@bout-tyme.net>
In-Reply-To: <20130124130903.GD5256@misibook.ipv6.hrusecky.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8611604535725512130=="

--===============8611604535725512130==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 01/24/2013 08:09 AM, Michal Hrusecky pecked at the keyboard and wrote:
> Linda Walsh -  0:42 24.01.13 wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Also a quick grep turns up
>> startup scripts, using Bash's '[['
>> syntax, such as:
>>
>> boot.localfs
>> boot.kdump
>> dhcpd
>> dhcpd6
>> kbd
>> dictd
>> cifs
>> monit
>> mysql
>
> mysql uses #!/bin/bash
>

The #! line determines the shell environment that the script will use. 
It is up to the programmer to determine which shell provides the most #! 
for the buck.

-- 
Ken Schneider
SuSe since Version 5.2, June 1998
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============8611604535725512130==--


From suse@tlinx.org Thu Jan 24 17:22:54 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:22:07 -0800
Message-ID: <51016DBF.8090603@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130124093257.GA19718@boole.suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3792678035601831011=="

--===============3792678035601831011==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dr. Werner Fink wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:42:51AM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote:
>> I'm constantly seeing system scripts starting with #!/bin/sh which
>> tells BASH to run in POSIX conformance mode, yet occasionally,
>> more or less randomly, I'll see "BASHism's" in the script.
>>
>> Case in point: the cron job for logrotate references
>> the Array PIPESTATUS to get at the exit value of log rotate.
> 
> True.
> 
>> Arrays and PIPESTATUS never used to be part of POSIX.
> 
> True.
> 
>> Also a quick grep turns up
>> startup scripts, using Bash's '[['
>> syntax, such as:
> 
> AFAIK the `[[ ... ]]' is known in latest POSIX, see e.g.
> 
>       http://manuals.ts.fujitsu.com/file/8867/posix_k.pdf
> 
> on page 44 and page 57ff.  And not only the bash does it
> use but also the ksh, IMHO most user should use this
> for any Conditional Expression instead of the `test ...' or
> the '[ ... ]' builtin to be sure not run into trouble if
> regular experssions are used  ;)
> 
> Also the `let ...' builtin ... or its equivalent `(( ... ))'
> for integer arithmetic's are well known, see page 448ff.
----
	Does this imply that the check Bernhard Voelker
did that checks for "bashisms", is faulty, or has it
been updated to allow for the newest/greatest/latest
POSIX-of-the-day standard?

	It's hard to keep track which has been added and
which is Bash specific -- PIPESTATUS and ARRAYS -- they
weren't part of the original POSIX, but POSIX 2013?


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============3792678035601831011==--


From suse@tlinx.org Thu Jan 24 17:24:44 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:23:58 -0800
Message-ID: <51016E2E.8080904@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130124130903.GD5256@misibook.ipv6.hrusecky.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8775688275285364694=="

--===============8775688275285364694==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Michal Hrusecky wrote:
> 
> mysql uses #!/bin/bash
> 
---
	A gem among the the scripts
for declaring it's flavor!  ;-)


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============8775688275285364694==--


From crrodriguez@opensuse.org Thu Jan 24 17:26:16 2013
From: Cristian =?utf-8?q?Rodr=C3=ADguez?= <crrodriguez@opensuse.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 14:25:15 -0300
Message-ID: <51016E7B.1060105@opensuse.org>
In-Reply-To: <5100F40B.8050909@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2306819698162932818=="

--===============2306819698162932818==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

El 24/01/13 05:42, Linda Walsh escribió:

> boot.localfs
> boot.kdump

Those will go away as systemd no longer supports early boot init 
scripts. so they can be left as is.

> dhcpd
> dhcpd6
> kbd
> dictd
> cifs
> monit
> mysql
> named
> zfs-fuse

If absent, those need native systemd units that do not have this issue, 
as there is no shell available for them at all.

Many of those are redundant now and can be safely ignored.

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============2306819698162932818==--


From suse@tlinx.org Thu Jan 24 20:02:37 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject: [opensuse] script support and partition requirements of systemd? (was
 Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh")
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:01:51 -0800
Message-ID: <5101932F.5040301@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <51016E7B.1060105@opensuse.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3033649451947683446=="

--===============3033649451947683446==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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--===============3033649451947683446==--


From crrodriguez@opensuse.org Thu Jan 24 20:22:59 2013
From: Cristian =?utf-8?q?Rodr=C3=ADguez?= <crrodriguez@opensuse.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject: Re: [opensuse] script support and partition requirements of systemd?
 (was Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh")
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 17:21:58 -0300
Message-ID: <510197E6.4060803@opensuse.org>
In-Reply-To: <5101932F.5040301@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5890325378165109313=="

--===============5890325378165109313==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

El 24/01/13 17:01, Linda Walsh escribió:

>      What about local startup scripts.  I have a few to start services
> and monitor things of my own.

Please read what I've said above. I stated that "early boot sysv 
scripts" are no longer supported in upcoming systemd versions, this 
scripts are provided by distributions to setup stuff *before* any user 
provided scripts are even taken into consideration.

>      That's one thing that seems to be a pain with the new systemd service,
> is that writing a shell script is pretty much standard SysAdmin knowledge.
> But is configuring a non-standards-compliant service like systemd going
> to be
> something so easily configured?
>
>      Another problem I've been having lately is being unable to boot
> unless I first boot into 'S' and mount /usr.

both /boot and /usr are mounted by the initrd (either created by old 
mkinitrd or dracut)  I dont understand what problem you are facing exactly.

>      What file systems is systemd capable of mounting before it brings
> up the rest of
> the system?  Or rather what other file systems besides /usr is it not
> capable of mounting?
> /tmp?  /var/tmp?  /var?  /var/cache  /proc?   For that matter, why can
> systemd mount /proc
> and /sys, but not /usr?

Systemd only mounts either the pseudofilesystems itself requires to 
function or what you supplied in /etc/fstab or in .mount or .automount 
units.





-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============5890325378165109313==--


From suse@tlinx.org Fri Jan 25 05:03:22 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject: [opensuse] Re: script support and partition requirements of systemd?
 (was Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh")
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 21:02:35 -0800
Message-ID: <510211EB.30506@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <510197E6.4060803@opensuse.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6375375024806461979=="

--===============6375375024806461979==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Cristian Rodr=C3=ADguez wrote:
> El 24/01/13 17:01, Linda Walsh escribi=C3=B3:
>=20
>>      What about local startup scripts.  I have a few to start services
>> and monitor things of my own.
>=20
> Please read what I've said above. I stated that "early boot sysv=20
> scripts" are no longer supported in upcoming systemd versions, this=20
> scripts are provided by distributions to setup stuff *before* any user=20
> provided scripts are even taken into consideration.
>=20
>>
>>      Another problem I've been having lately is being unable to boot
>> unless I first boot into 'S' and mount /usr.
>=20
> both /boot and /usr are mounted by the initrd (either created by old=20
> mkinitrd or dracut)  I dont understand what problem you are facing exactly.
-----
	I am using a vanilla kernel downloaded from kernel.org.  It has
the hardware options needed for most of my purposes (and probably a few
I don't need -- it's hard to find out which ones can be useful)
built into the kernel, so the kernel boots and immediately starts to run
startup scripts from the hard disk.

	It used to be that it would use the pre-level 1 startup scripts like
boot.localfs, to mount local file systems.

	It no longer does that.  I have to boot to level 'S' (level 1 won't work)
and mount /usr manually.  /boot doesn't appear to be necessary for the system=
 to=20
come
up because the kernel is already loaded (why does '/boot' need to be mounted =
during
system startup -- it needs to be mounted when I update my kernel, but at syst=
em=20
startup?

	Only a few modules are really needed after boot and are loaded out of /lib/m=
odules
on demand after boot:
# lsmod
Module                  Size  Used by
sch_sfq                10080  3
sch_htb                15123  1
mousedev               11440  1
acpi_cpufreq            7577  1
mperf                   1348  1 acpi_cpufreq
processor              35852  1 acpi_cpufreq
----------

Actual module usage is higher as one can tell from /sys/modules:

# ls /sys/module/
8250_core/         edd/              kgdboc/             processor/
acpi/              efivars/          libahci/            pstore/
acpi_cpufreq/      ehci_hcd/         libata/             rcutree/
acpi_power_meter/  firewire_ohci/    lockd/              sch_htb/
ahci/              fscache/          lockdep/            sch_sfq/
auth_rpcgss/       gpio_ich/         loop/               scsi_mod/
block/             hid/              megaraid_sas/       scsi_transport_fc/
bnx2/              i2c_algo_bit/     mousedev/           scsi_transport_iscsi/
bonding/           i2c_i801/         mperf/              sg/
brd/               i2o_core/         mptbase/            spurious/
cifs/              i7300_idle/       mptsas/             sr_mod/
coretemp/          i7core_edac/      mptscsih/           sunrpc/
cpuidle/           i8042/            nbd/                tcp_htcp/
dca/               intel_idle/       netpoll/            uhci_hcd/
dcdbas/            ioatdma/          nf_conntrack/       uinput/
debug_core/        ipmi_msghandler/  nf_conntrack_ipv4/  usbcore/
dell_rbu/          ipmi_si/          nfs/                usbhid/
dns_resolver/      ixgbe/            nfsd/               vt/
drm/               kdb_main/         pcie_aspm/          xt_recent/
e1000e/            kernel/           pnp/                xz_dec/
edac_core/         keyboard/         printk/

----------

	For some reason, the startup scripts don't mount file systems like
/usr -- so it has to be done manually, by first going into level 'S' mounting
it, then issuing an init 3...

	So I'm wondering how I have another boot level, maybe 'B', (for boot)
like 'S', where it does things like mounting the local disks necessary for
systemd to function, since except for /usr, it seems to be able to mount
the rest of the file systems.

	There was a problem running mount after a recent update, but that
was because some libraries it needed were put in /usr/lib64.  Putting
them in /lib64 and links in /usr/lib64 solved that problem.

	So I'm wondering how I can get my own "pre-boot" script run,
that can automatically mount /usr, and do basic system startup, so
systemd can be happy?


>=20
> Systemd only mounts either the pseudofilesystems itself requires to=20
> function or what you supplied in /etc/fstab or in .mount or .automount=20
> units.
----
	I supplied /usr in /etc/fstab, but it doesn't mount that one.

=09
	Of course, none of this helps when everything is link dynamically
and most of your utils were built with a custom glibc that needs OW_CRYPT_1
which isn't included, by default, when you install the latest glibc from their
website.


	You can't even 'sync' the disks before going down -- so disk corrupt is a
given and a complete restore from backups becomes necessary in such cases.

	Things are getting very fragile...

	Am afraid to reboot my system these days (last uptime was over 40 days
but made mistake of trying to update glibc, not knowing all of suse's apps we=
re
linked with with a non-default option so none function after installing the l=
atest
new glibc (they are supposed to be backwards compatible, but not unless you k=
now
what special symbols have been linked in... ;-)...


	So how can I run a setup script to mount /usr without using init 's'?


--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============6375375024806461979==--


From werner.flamme@email.de Fri Jan 25 08:02:11 2013
From: Werner Flamme <werner.flamme@email.de>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:01:27 +0100
Message-ID: <51023BD7.6020907@email.de>
In-Reply-To: <5100F40B.8050909@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7115555926596046686=="

--===============7115555926596046686==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Linda Walsh [24.01.2013 09:42]:
> 
> I'm constantly seeing system scripts starting with #!/bin/sh which
> tells BASH to run in POSIX conformance mode, yet occasionally,
> more or less randomly, I'll see "BASHism's" in the script.

Why don't you open a ticket (or one per script) at the bugzilla?


-- 

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============7115555926596046686==--


From opensuse@antonaylward.com Fri Jan 25 15:15:52 2013
From: Anton Aylward <opensuse@antonaylward.com>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject: Re: [opensuse] Re: script support and partition requirements of
 systemd? (was Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh")
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 08:49:09 -0500
Message-ID: <51028D55.9030307@antonaylward.com>
In-Reply-To: <510211EB.30506@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7215133118269558589=="

--===============7215133118269558589==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Linda Walsh said the following on 01/25/2013 12:02 AM:
> 
> 
> 	So how can I run a setup script to mount /usr without using init 's'?

The short answer is implicit in Cristian's observation about the initrd.
Yes you should have a initrd that mounts both /boot and /usr.

There's a lot out there on making custom initrd.  And as you say, the
distribution one has a lot you don't need (and is very large and slow)
since it was designed to be able to run on any platform, any IO.  If
you're not using LVM, XFS ... but are using crypt, then you have a
*VERY* *STRONG* motivation to make a custom initrd.

The mechanics of making an initrd are, as I say, well documented.  The
hard part is deciding what to leave in and what to leave out :-)

Your distribution kernel is what?  15M or so in 12.2
You should be able to reduce that to around 5M

I forget the commands to list all that's in an initrd, but it was
mentioned here a few weeks ago.  Look it up and run it but please keep
your "OMG! I Don't Need All That!" reaction to yourself, eh, we *know*
you don't need all the 15M of the distribution kernel; few people do,
That's why people rebuild their initrds.




-- 
A computer without COBOL and Fortran is like a piece of chocolate cake
without ketchup and mustard.
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============7215133118269558589==--


From suse@tlinx.org Fri Jan 25 17:26:24 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject: [opensuse] Re: script support and partition requirements of systemd?
 (was Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh")
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:25:36 -0800
Message-ID: <5102C010.7050407@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <51028D55.9030307@antonaylward.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7612697126750496209=="

--===============7612697126750496209==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Anton Aylward wrote:
> Linda Walsh said the following on 01/25/2013 12:02 AM:
>>
>> 	So how can I run a setup script to mount /usr without using init 's'?
> 
> The short answer is implicit in Cristian's observation about the initrd.
> Yes you should have a initrd that mounts both /boot and /usr.
----
	Why?   If the system comes up without them in 'S' mode, and I can
mount them manually and the system then comes up, why can't I automate
that with a script?
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============7612697126750496209==--


From suse@tlinx.org Fri Jan 25 17:35:50 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:35:04 -0800
Message-ID: <5102C248.6050600@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <51023BD7.6020907@email.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8664542413017676546=="

--===============8664542413017676546==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Werner Flamme wrote:
> Linda Walsh [24.01.2013 09:42]:
>> I'm constantly seeing system scripts starting with #!/bin/sh which
>> tells BASH to run in POSIX conformance mode, yet occasionally,
>> more or less randomly, I'll see "BASHism's" in the script.
> 
> Why don't you open a ticket (or one per script) at the bugzilla?
---
	Why would you suggest such a huge waste of time?

	Berhard Voelker was able to run one command on his system that
pointed to 400 scripts with problems.  You really think it would be the
best use of anyone's resources to open up a bug for each of those manually
when the problem is a systemic one that is found with a script in 1 step?

	It almost seems like you don't care -- and if that's the case
why would you want the bug reports filed in the first place?

	Is this your equivalent of "go play in the streets?...

;^/

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============8664542413017676546==--


From per@computer.org Fri Jan 25 17:44:33 2013
From: Per Jessen <per@computer.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 18:43:50 +0100
Message-ID: <kdug8m$km$2@saturn.local.net>
In-Reply-To: <5102C248.6050600@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5429121899877252432=="

--===============5429121899877252432==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Linda Walsh wrote:

> Werner Flamme wrote:
>> Linda Walsh [24.01.2013 09:42]:
>>> I'm constantly seeing system scripts starting with #!/bin/sh which
>>> tells BASH to run in POSIX conformance mode, yet occasionally,
>>> more or less randomly, I'll see "BASHism's" in the script.
>> 
>> Why don't you open a ticket (or one per script) at the bugzilla?
> ---
> Why would you suggest such a huge waste of time?
> 

He didn't - notice the 'or'. 

> Berhard Voelker was able to run one command on his system that
> pointed to 400 scripts with problems.  You really think it would be
> the best use of anyone's resources to open up a bug for each of those
> manually when the problem is a systemic one that is found with a
> script in 1 step?

s/systemic/habitual/ methinks - I can only speak for myself, but I
habitually also use /bin/sh even if I might be using bash-only features
in a script. 

Is this perhaps something we can test for during build time?  I doubt if
we can expect much testing on systems which default to a non-bash
shell, so it would be better to test during packaging.

> It almost seems like you don't care -- and if that's the case
> why would you want the bug reports filed in the first place?

Just _a_ bug report. 



-- 
Per Jessen, Zürich (-2.4°C)
http://www.dns24.ch/ - free DNS hosting, made in Switzerland.

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============5429121899877252432==--


From opensuse@antonaylward.com Fri Jan 25 18:53:21 2013
From: Anton Aylward <opensuse@antonaylward.com>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject: Re: [opensuse] Re: script support and partition requirements of
 systemd? (was Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh")
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:52:36 -0500
Message-ID: <5102D474.2070200@antonaylward.com>
In-Reply-To: <5102C010.7050407@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1855386698525698334=="

--===============1855386698525698334==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Linda Walsh said the following on 01/25/2013 12:25 PM:
> Anton Aylward wrote:
>> Linda Walsh said the following on 01/25/2013 12:02 AM:
>>>
>>> 	So how can I run a setup script to mount /usr without using init 's'?
>>
>> The short answer is implicit in Cristian's observation about the initrd.
>> Yes you should have a initrd that mounts both /boot and /usr.
> ----
> 	Why?   If the system comes up without them in 'S' mode, and I can
> mount them manually and the system then comes up, why can't I automate
> that with a script?
> 


DUH?
I don't understand why 'the lady doth protest too much'.
Why bother with a script to do it when you can do it simply 'by proper
configuration'

If the system comes up with them mounted does it matter to you if initrd
does it 'behind the scenes (sorry, no Hamlet quote here) or a script
does it behind the scenes?

The way I look at it the CORRECT way is to have an initrd that does what
you want and only what you want.

Back in the "The 12.2 installer is smarter than I thought" that I
started  Per Jessen suggested

    lsinitrd /boot/initrd

shows me a 16M initrd with piles and piles and piles of stuff I don't
need.  Drivers, file systems, fsck and more.  Per also says he has
initrds that are only 4M or 5M.

Proper configuration or script?  Set up the configuration properly
(drakut makes this easier) and you get a properly built kernel and
initrd every time :-)

Of course you could always pre-empt the future and run a system that has
a single unified root+/usr.  That's how its going to be.  That's how I'm
setting up my machines from now on.  And since I've been using LVM for
years its easy for me to convert to that.

What's that?  yes I need grub2 and despite what Felix says I've not had
any problems with grub2 on any of my machines, not just opensuse12 but
fedora and mageia.  And some of the machines are a bit .. pressed and
yes they run samba and Apache and other services.

There's a lot of literature out there on mkinitrd and a growing amount
on drakut.  The thing is that drakut is much more obvious and easy to
use than mkinitrd, deceptively so.  Heck, it even aborts and complains
when you tell it to do something stupid!  I wish more s/w were like that.

-- 
Most of what we call management consists of making it difficult for
people to get their work done.
   --Peter F. Drucker
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============1855386698525698334==--


From suse@tlinx.org Fri Jan 25 19:51:15 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject: [opensuse] Re: script support and partition requirements of systemd?
 (was Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh")
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:50:27 -0800
Message-ID: <5102E203.8000505@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <5102D474.2070200@antonaylward.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3189083913159240479=="

--===============3189083913159240479==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Anton Aylward wrote:
> The way I look at it the CORRECT way is to have an initrd that does what
> you want and only what you want.
----
=09
	What does initrd have on it that does the mounting of '/usr'?

	Isn't it a "script" and a copy of "mount"?



> Proper configuration or script?  Set up the configuration properly
> (drakut makes this easier) and you get a properly built kernel and
> initrd every time :-)
---
	drakut determines what modules your kernel needs, and unless
you add plugins, it won't add mounting code for /usr.  According
to it's mission statement, it is designed to only put the *modules*
on the initrd necessary for booting your specific HW.

	Something else must then take control and execute some copy
of 'mount' to make sure /usr is mounted.



>=20
> Of course you could always pre-empt the future and run a system that has
> a single unified root+/usr.  That's how its going to be.=20
----
	Ok, but what about all the directories under /usr?

	How many of them also have to be mounted?   /usr/homes could
be a place where people put home directories.  /usr/share is supposed to
be arch independent material that can be 1) quite large, 2) should be
shareable, 3) quite likely should be 0n a separate partition from /root and /=
usr as
the size of /usr/share can easily be larger than the combined size of root an=
d /usr.
15G vs. 10.6G on my system.

	However, reviewing my boot log just now, I see that arbitrary directories
seem to be required from /usr/share for boot:


udevd[602]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 512 09': No such file or dire=
ctory
udevd[603]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 896 09': No such file or dire=
ctory
udevd[604]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 256 09': No such file or dire=
ctory
udevd[607]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 384 09': No such file or dire=
ctory
udevd[608]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 768 09': No such file or dire=
ctory
udevd[609]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 0 09': No such file or direct=
ory
udevd[610]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 128 09': No such file or dire=
ctory
udevd[611]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 640 09': No such file or dire=
ctory
udevd[619]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 769 00': No such file or dire=
ctory
udevd[623]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 1 09': No such file or direct=
ory
udevd[631]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 3 00': No such file or direct=
ory
udevd[632]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh'=20
'/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 2 00': No such file or direct=
ory

----
	This means arbitrary shell scripts are needed to *cleanly* "boot"
before I could even get a shell prompt.  Are those "signed" kernel modules
being loaded? I don't get a good feeling about the security of needing to
load shell scripts off of /usr/share in order to boot.


	In short -- we see shell scripts being called even when booting to
mode 'S'...   Requiring /usr is bad enough (8.0G v. root at 4.6G).

	Now it used to be root was larger and /usr was smaller.  But the only
reason /usr needs to be mounted is the 2-4G of material that was moved off of
/root into /usr.   I.e. it created a problem that didn't exist:
# ll -h /backups/Ishtar/root/*-0-*
-rw-rw---- 1 6.7G Sep  1 04:32 /backups/Ishtar/root/root-120901-0-0430.dump
-rw-rw---- 1 7.1G Oct  1 04:32 /backups/Ishtar/root/root-121001-0-0430.dump
-rw-rw---- 1 7.4G Nov  1 04:31 /backups/Ishtar/root/root-121101-0-0430.dump
-rw-rw---- 1 3.7G Dec  1 04:31 /backups/Ishtar/root/root-121201-0-0430.dump
-rw-rw---- 1 4.1G Jan  1 04:31 /backups/Ishtar/root/root-130101-0-0430.dump
# lh /backups/Ishtar/usr/*-0-*
-rw-rw---- 1 6.5G Sep  1 04:35 /backups/Ishtar/usr/usr-120901-0-0432.dump
-rw-rw---- 1 7.3G Oct  1 04:36 /backups/Ishtar/usr/usr-121001-0-0432.dump
-rw-rw---- 1 7.1G Nov  1 04:35 /backups/Ishtar/usr/usr-121101-0-0431.dump
-rw-rw---- 1 7.5G Dec  1 04:34 /backups/Ishtar/usr/usr-121201-0-0431.dump
-rw-rw---- 1 7.6G Jan  1 04:35 /backups/Ishtar/usr/usr-130101-0-0431.dump

As I've upgraded from 12.1->12.[23], more and more files are being moved off
/root onto /usr.   So let's say I combine /usr and /root.

Where does it stop?   Do I need all of /usr/share as well -- the largest part=
s being
font, icons, clipart and docs:
# du -sh *|hsort -s|tail -10
184M    clipart
198M    kde4
246M    locale
338M    man
714M    texmf
753M    icons
1.7G    doc
6.5G    fonts
----    -----
12.5G   TOTAL

My system disk currently fits in <18G.  (that doesn't include 'share'). It was
sized small with a fast (15K SCSI) disk, with the idea that most larger progs
could be on the LVM-managed slower-seek + faster throughput large RAID.

Will /usr/local also be required for boot?  That's historically been for site=
-local
material.

This is why I am asking for specifics -- when you say /usr, are you
including those who have /usr/home?  (likely not as that's an uncommon config=
, BUT,
running shell scripts off of /usr/share in order to boot used to be uncommon =
as=20
well.










--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============3189083913159240479==--


From suse@tlinx.org Fri Jan 25 20:03:12 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 12:02:26 -0800
Message-ID: <5102E4D2.3020108@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <kdug8m$km$2@saturn.local.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2614551785978847888=="

--===============2614551785978847888==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Per Jessen wrote:
> Linda Walsh wrote:
>=20
>> Werner Flamme wrote:
>>> Linda Walsh [24.01.2013 09:42]:
>>>> I'm constantly seeing system scripts starting with #!/bin/sh
>>>> yet I'll see "BASHism's" in the script.
>>> Why don't you open a ticket (or one per script) at the bugzilla?
>> ---
>> Why would you suggest such a huge waste of time?

>=20
> Just _a_ bug report.=20
----
	Far more reasonable:

Bug 800607 Submitted
system scripts should be scan'ed for bashims, and have 1st line update to bas=
h=20
if used
--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============2614551785978847888==--


From suse@tlinx.org Fri Jan 25 21:43:04 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:42:17 -0800
Message-ID: <5102FC39.10705@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <5102E4D2.3020108@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3609191225315935691=="

--===============3609191225315935691==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Linda Walsh wrote:
> Per Jessen wrote:
>>
>> Just _a_ bug report.=20
> ----
>     Far more reasonable:
>=20
> Bug 800607 Submitted
> system scripts should be scan'ed for bashims, and have 1st line update=20
> to bash if used

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D800607

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D800607#c1


Guido Berh=C3=B6rster <gber(a)opensuse.org> changed:

            What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Status|NEW                         |CLOSED
                  CC|                            |gber(a)opensuse.org
          Resolution|                            |INVALID

--- Comment #1 from Guido Berh=C3=B6rster <gber(a)opensuse.org> 2013-01-25 20=
:17:57 UTC ---
That already exists as part of rpmlint which runs checkbashisms and dash -n on
every script. Automatically changing the shebang is out of question since both
are in no way reliable.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
CLOSED/INVALID.... and you wonder why I think filing bug reports is a waste o=
f time.



--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============3609191225315935691==--


From opensuse@antonaylward.com Fri Jan 25 22:45:23 2013
From: Anton Aylward <opensuse@antonaylward.com>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject: Re: [opensuse] Re: script support and partition requirements of
 systemd? (was Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh")
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:44:36 -0500
Message-ID: <51030AD4.6080003@antonaylward.com>
In-Reply-To: <5102E203.8000505@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5031896067355531357=="

--===============5031896067355531357==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Linda Walsh said the following on 01/25/2013 02:50 PM:
> Anton Aylward wrote:
>> The way I look at it the CORRECT way is to have an initrd that does what
>> you want and only what you want.
> ----
> =09
> 	What does initrd have on it that does the mounting of '/usr'?

Why don't you run 'lsinitrd' and find out?

> 	Isn't it a "script" and a copy of "mount"?

No, its what it takes to boot the system.

>> Proper configuration or script?  Set up the configuration properly
>> (drakut makes this easier) and you get a properly built kernel and
>> initrd every time :-)
> ---
> 	drakut determines what modules your kernel needs, and unless
> you add plugins, it won't add mounting code for /usr.  According
> to it's mission statement, it is designed to only put the *modules*
> on the initrd necessary for booting your specific HW.

Conversely you could look at it as drakut takes a lot in by default
unless you tell it to exclude stuff.  The config file can be viewed both
ways :-)

My point is that you *DO* get to choose.  You specify what you want.

You have stated you want /usr mounted.
So that determines the module you want included.
You don't want, say the XFS file system or the Btrfs file system, so you
exclude those and you boot faster since you have a smaller initrd.

The point is that *YOU* are in control.

With the distribution kernel, which you said you were using, you have to
take what you are given whether you want it or not, and if it lacks
something, like mounting /usr, then tough.  The decision as to what
modules are part of the initrd have been taken out of your hands.

You can either live with it, and have to finagle work-arounds, as you
are doing, as you seem unhappy with or we wouldn't be having this
thread, or you can do something about it, build a new initrd.  That's
mkinitrd or drakut.

Either way, you are going to have to specify, somehow or other, what to
include and what to exclude.

> 	Something else must then take control and execute some copy
> of 'mount' to make sure /usr is mounted.

Do you want to take a diversion into the innards of how drakut/initrd
work and how the initial boot does it stuff and pivots?  I'd really
rather not.  You can google for all that and read it up at your leisure
and emerge from that process knowing, in all probability, more about it
than I do.

>> Of course you could always pre-empt the future and run a system that has
>> a single unified root+/usr.  That's how its going to be.=20
> ----
> 	Ok, but what about all the directories under /usr?

What about them?

I have /usr/share as a separate partition.
I suppose that's what you mean, partitions not directories.

I have no problem.

> 	How many of them also have to be mounted?   /usr/homes could
> be a place where people put home directories.  /usr/share is supposed to
> be arch independent material that can be 1) quite large, 2) should be
> shareable, 3) quite likely should be 0n a separate partition from /root and=
 /usr as
> the size of /usr/share can easily be larger than the combined size of root =
and /usr.
> 15G vs. 10.6G on my system.

Oh yes, there's a lot in there, all the docs and manual pages and stuff
like that :-)

Your point being?

> 	However, reviewing my boot log just now, I see that arbitrary directories
> seem to be required from /usr/share for boot:


> udevd[602]: failed to execute '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh' =

> '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxCreateUSBNode.sh 189 512 09': No such file or di=
rectory


There is the boot that initrd does and then system 'pivots' and what you
probably think of boot takes over.

Stop and think why those appear in your log files.
To be there the logger has to be running.
When does the logger start?

Well it may be /etc/init.d/syslog or in my systemd-driven 11.2 its in
syslog.target.  So to get there the RC stuff or systemd mist be running.
That's away along, after the 'pivot'.

Then we get to where udevd starts running to start up virtualbox.

I won't go down that avenue, but it may have something to do with other
aspects of configuration.


> ----
> 	This means arbitrary shell scripts are needed to *cleanly* "boot"
> before I could even get a shell prompt.  Are those "signed" kernel modules
> being loaded? I don't get a good feeling about the security of needing to
> load shell scripts off of /usr/share in order to boot.

I agree with that last line and I think that is an artefact of the way
you have configured your system, not a necessary way the system has to
be configured.  I don't start virtualbox on boot so I'm not able to comment.

But I disagree with the idea that your first sentence is a necessity.

> 	In short -- we see shell scripts being called even when booting to
> mode 'S'...   Requiring /usr is bad enough (8.0G v. root at 4.6G).

Linda, all you are talking about is really after boot, after initrd has
done its stuff.

The issue of whether /usr should be a separate partition has been
debated elsewhere.  I was - still am to a degree - in favour of
partitioning over OneBigFileSystem.  Many reasons such as Oh-squared.
But there are many things that get changed which old fogies like myself
who grew up with V7 on a PDP-11 and 10M TR think the young
whipper-snappers have gone wild with, things like *shock* *horror*
"virtual memory" -- heck even having more than 1 megabytes of memory!

But, like they say "change happens".  If I can live with systems with
more than I megabyte of memory I'm sure you can live with the huge
drives we have today that have one partition for root and /usr/.

And Gee-wow!  I use LVM, so the conversion was not a big deal for me.


> 	Now it used to be root was larger and /usr was smaller.  But the only
> reason /usr needs to be mounted is the 2-4G of material that was moved off =
of
> /root into /usr. =20

So?  If that's all, then move it back.



> Where does it stop?   Do I need all of /usr/share as well -- the largest pa=
rts being
> font, icons, clipart and docs:

Don't be ridiculous!
Those are only needed when you go into graphics mode.  Nothing to do
with boot.


> Will /usr/local also be required for boot?  That's historically been for si=
te-local
> material.

Why should it be?

> This is why I am asking for specifics -- when you say /usr, are you
> including those who have /usr/home?  (likely not as that's an uncommon conf=
ig, BUT,
> running shell scripts off of /usr/share in order to boot used to be uncommo=
n as=20
> well.

You seem to be confusing boot with 'going multi user' or with 'going to
graphics mode'.

If no user logs in then why does a /home' need to be mounted?
In fact we've discussed 'roaming share' where the "home" is on the NFS
server and is only mounted when the use logs in at whatever workstation
he or she logs in at.  As I've pointed out before, SUN were doing this
back in the 1980s.







If you're running sysvinit and your inittab says to go to mode 1 or 3
and you have the entry in fstab for /usr, then you have a problem with
something you've configured earlier on that preventing the system
getting past S.

Once I had a thing like that; my / needed a good fsck and boot wasn't
doing it.  Maybe something similar here.  Its why I don't use /etc/3 for
/ any more.

My suspicion is that you've done something non-normal that necessitates
this odd behaviour.  Be it config or fsck.

Yes, I'm used to fixing this kind of thing, but that's in 'admin
consulting' and 'hands on' mode, where I can scan for 'suspicious
changes' and all the things you're not showing us.

As I say, what initrd does and init -- process #1 -- does are different.
You seem confused over the two.







--=20
Teachers open the door. You enter by yourself.
    Chinese Proverb
--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============5031896067355531357==--


From suse@tlinx.org Sat Jan 26 01:25:39 2013
From: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:24:55 -0800
Message-ID: <51033067.2010904@tlinx.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130124093257.GA19718@boole.suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2596346435772896545=="

--===============2596346435772896545==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dr. Werner Fink wrote:
> 
> AFAIK the `[[ ... ]]' is known in latest POSIX, see e.g.
> 
>       http://manuals.ts.fujitsu.com/file/8867/posix_k.pdf
----
Checking the posix source @
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html

Shows that while (()) are used in arithmetic,

[[]] are not posix compliant.

Neither are arrays supported.

-----------------


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============2596346435772896545==--


From ajh@nitio.de Sun Jan 27 03:31:14 2013
From: Anders Johansson <ajh@nitio.de>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 04:30:25 +0100
Message-ID: <2236314.Z7IMWZ3P3s@carolin>
In-Reply-To: <5102FC39.10705@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1123778833166599542=="

--===============1123778833166599542==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Friday 25 January 2013 13:42:17 Linda Walsh wrote:
> Linda Walsh wrote:
> > Per Jessen wrote:
> >> Just _a_ bug report.
> >=20
> > ----
> >=20
> >     Far more reasonable:
> > Bug 800607 Submitted
> > system scripts should be scan'ed for bashims, and have 1st line update
> > to bash if used
>=20
> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D800607
>=20
> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D800607#c1
>=20
>=20
> Guido Berh=C3=B6rster <gber(a)opensuse.org> changed:
>=20
>             What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Status|NEW                         |CLOSED
>                   CC|                            |gber(a)opensuse.org
>           Resolution|                            |INVALID
>=20
> --- Comment #1 from Guido Berh=C3=B6rster <gber(a)opensuse.org> 2013-01-25 =
20:17:57
> UTC --- That already exists as part of rpmlint which runs checkbashisms and
> dash -n on every script. Automatically changing the shebang is out of
> question since both are in no way reliable.
>=20
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> CLOSED/INVALID.... and you wonder why I think filing bug reports is a waste
> of time.

You were given a perfectly valid answer, the checks you requested are already=
=20
being performed.

I think the real problem is that you opened a bug for something you thought=20
was a bug, but really isn't. Werner already pointed out that what you thought=
=20
wasn't in POSIX is really in there

If you find a script that fails when run with sh, which requires bash, that i=
s=20
a bug. "I think this requires bash" is not. especially since you apparently=20
don't know what requires bash and what doesn't.

Anders
--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============1123778833166599542==--


From crrodriguez@opensuse.org Sun Jan 27 04:16:46 2013
From: Cristian =?utf-8?q?Rodr=C3=ADguez?= <crrodriguez@opensuse.org>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 01:15:43 -0300
Message-ID: <5104A9EF.8080604@opensuse.org>
In-Reply-To: <2236314.Z7IMWZ3P3s@carolin>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0874754192018114094=="

--===============0874754192018114094==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

El 27/01/13 00:30, Anders Johansson escribi=C3=B3:

> I think the real problem is that you opened a bug for something you thought
> was a bug, but really isn't. Werner already pointed out that what you thoug=
ht
> wasn't in POSIX is really in there
>
> If you find a script that fails when run with sh, which requires bash, that=
 is
> a bug. "I think this requires bash" is not.

Also, just for Linda's information, do not bother filling bug reports in=20
init scripts, those will likely not get fixed.

--=20
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============0874754192018114094==--


From werner.flamme@email.de Sun Jan 27 14:25:29 2013
From: Werner Flamme <werner.flamme@email.de>
To: users@lists.opensuse.org
Subject:
 Re: [opensuse] Re: system scripts using BASHism's but invoked as "#!/bin/sh"
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 15:24:44 +0100
Message-ID: <510538AC.9080300@email.de>
In-Reply-To: <51033067.2010904@tlinx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2917065206541254638=="

--===============2917065206541254638==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

[26.01.2013 02:24] [Linda Walsh]:
> Dr. Werner Fink wrote:
>> 
>> AFAIK the `[[ ... ]]' is known in latest POSIX, see e.g.
>> 
>>       http://manuals.ts.fujitsu.com/file/8867/posix_k.pdf

This is from 2009

> ----
> Checking the posix source @
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html

This is from 2004

> 
> Shows that while (()) are used in arithmetic,
> 
> [[]] are not posix compliant.
> 
> Neither are arrays supported.

May things have changed in 5 years?

-- 


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner(a)opensuse.org

--===============2917065206541254638==--