Delay during installation of master server

On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 11:06:31AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:

> Please split /etc/init.d/nis into /etc/init.d/ypserv and
> /etc/init.d/ypbind to make it possible to restart only the server or
> only the client part of NIS.

I had some vauge thoughts that it might be best to split the entire NIS
package into separate server and client parts - they are distinct
upstream and it'd simplify the whole 'do you want to run a server'
thing. I haven't discussed that with Miquel at all, though, or really
thought it through - and it'd be post-Sarge material.

--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

Hi

You're right of corse, autofs should probably start as early as
with mountnfs.sh in single user mode.

Because most people expect autofs to work with NIS, I don't want
to start it before ypbind running though.

nis is started as number 19 in multi-user runlevels, which
leaves me no way to start autfs after ypbind but before other
daemons.

I suggest splitting the nis init script into a part that does an
ypbind and is started right after portmap, and a server part
that can be startet later.

portmap is started in single user mode before mountnfs.sh
(obviously), thus this would allow me to put autofs init in a
sensible place.

HTH, 2ri
--
Help securing email, spread GPG, clearsign all mail. http://www.gnupg.org
.
< hjw> statistics are like a bikini, what they reveal is suggestive,
what they conceal is vital

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Arthur Korn wrote:
> You're right of corse, autofs should probably start as early as with
> mountnfs.sh in single user mode.
>
> Because most people expect autofs to work with NIS, I don't want to
> start it before ypbind running though.
>
> nis is started as number 19 in multi-user runlevels, which leaves me no
> way to start autfs after ypbind but before other daemons.

Eesh, yeah, that is tough. It'd be nice if there was a wider range of
numbers that things started on - IE, a few blanks between network service
and starting daemons, where other services that require networking but are
required by the daemons could start. This is exactly what 163116 is
discussing. A bit late now, though. :)

> I suggest splitting the nis init script into a part that does an ypbind
> and is started right after portmap, and a server part that can be
> startet later.
>
> portmap is started in single user mode before mountnfs.sh (obviously),
> thus this would allow me to put autofs init in a sensible place.

That sounds like a great idea to me!

------------------------------------------------------------------------
| nate carlson | <email address hidden> | http://www.natecarlson.com |
| depriving some poor village of its idiot since 1981 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 01:43:51AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote:

> I suggest splitting the nis init script into a part that does an
> ypbind and is started right after portmap, and a server part
> that can be startet later.

This won't fly terribly well with the fairly common case where the NIS
server is also its own client: the ypbind startup will time out waiting
for the server that isn't running yet. This produces an unwelcome pause
as the system starts up and means that having ypbind running may not
actually be doing any good (since there may be nothing for it to bind to
yet).

--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

Mark Brown schrieb:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 01:43:51AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote:
>
> > I suggest splitting the nis init script into a part that does an
> > ypbind and is started right after portmap, and a server part
> > that can be startet later.
>
> This won't fly terribly well with the fairly common case where the NIS
> server is also its own client.

Granted.

So what's keeping ypserv from being started before mountnfs.sh
in S44 so that there is no window where NFS shares are mounted
but NIS users are not yet available?

ciao, 2ri
--
Help securing email, spread GPG, clearsign all mail. http://www.gnupg.org
.
"They all can be blown up!"
"Riff, that's _always_ your plan!"
"It's more of a philosphy."
 -- http://www.sluggy.com/daily.php?date=030521

On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 01:07:28AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote:

> So what's keeping ypserv from being started before mountnfs.sh
> in S44 so that there is no window where NFS shares are mounted
> but NIS users are not yet available?

Off the top of my head /usr on NFS would be an issue.

--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

Hi

Mark Brown schrieb:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 01:07:28AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote:
>
> > So what's keeping ypserv from being started before mountnfs.sh
> > in S44 so that there is no window where NFS shares are mounted
> > but NIS users are not yet available?
>
> Off the top of my head /usr on NFS would be an issue.

I've shot over the line I see. Running autofs and nis out of / (ie without
/usr) would probably require too much work for it to be worth
it. So mountnfs.sh needs to run before any of those two.
Automounting /usr doesn't work then, but then it doesn't make
sense to me anyway and running an automounter on / is even
harmful.

So maybe this could work:
rcS.d:
S43portmap
S45mountnfs.sh
S50nis
S60autofs

(nfs-common is not started in S, it's not tremendously important
though, since it only starts statd nowadays).

ciao, 2ri
--
Help securing email, spread GPG, clearsign all mail. http://www.gnupg.org
.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?