I believe the file /etc/init.d/boot.local is the SuSE equivalent of rc.local, at least boot.local is "where you can enter additional commands to be executed at boot time before changing to a run level" (cf 7.2 manual, page 313)
doug _______________________________________________
Thanks, Doug. I found that file, and it says the exact same thing at the end of the file. Any idea why the same file also exists in /etc/rc.d/ along with boot.setup and some others? Greg
Gregory Avedissian wrote re SuSE's boot.local
Any idea why the same file also exists in /etc/rc.d/ along with boot.setup and some others?
Direct answer, no :-( I did a locate boot.local and got back only /etc/init.d/boot.local (I tried this on five machines here running SusE 7.2 and they all showed just one copy) However, just to be sure, I went to /etc/rc.d and a ls -al gave me that boot.local you describe! So now, I am at a loss as to why locate could not find it :-( but, anyway ... I then poked around in the boot scripts (cf "SuSE Boot Concept" in the manual p 309 ff, or just man init.d ) and took a look at /etc/rc.d/boot --- the file init runs at the beginning. In there you can search for "local" (i.e. less /etc/rc.d/boot and then enter /local <return> followed by three N's each to move on to the Next place there is a "local" ) and see that init, the program that counts here, looks for and at /etc/init.d/boot.local. So this indicates it is the boot.local in /etc/rc.d which is the odd one. There also does not seem to be a symbolic link between them. With SuSE I am always suspicious of what SuSEconfig and /etc/rc.config are doing so I wondered whether SuSEconfig was looking at both boot.local files. But it seems to look at neither; in particular, it does not use one to update the other. I poked around on the web and, at http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/mini/Wacom-USB-mini-HOWTO-4.html found "Next I added in the /etc/rc.d/boot.local file (remember, I use a SuSE distribution, but you should fine an equivalent for RedHat in /etc/rc.d/init.d/boot.local or /etc/rc.d/init.d/rc.local)" This makes me think the /etc/rc.d location is atavistic, harking back to earlier versions of SuSE. I looked in my old 5.2 manual and could not see a clear proof of this but I do note that with the 7.2 SuSE version they seem to have tried to stick more closely to standards (page 287) so that old /etc/rc.d resting place may be in for some backwards compatibility with user's old scripts. My only problem with that theory is that I cannot find where the /etc/rc.d/boot.local file would get read in 7.2 The bottom line is clear --- use /etc/init.d/boot.local if you want to add a special modprobe or the like in recent SuSE distros. But, I'll still keep my eyes open for confirmation of the above or an alternative view. doug
On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 05:41:05PM -0500, doug waud wrote:
Gregory Avedissian wrote re SuSE's boot.local
Any idea why the same file also exists in /etc/rc.d/ along with boot.setup and some others?
Direct answer, no :-(
I did a locate boot.local and got back only /etc/init.d/boot.local
(I tried this on five machines here running SusE 7.2 and they all showed just one copy)
However, just to be sure, I went to /etc/rc.d and a ls -al gave me that boot.local you describe!
So now, I am at a loss as to why locate could not find it :-( but, anyway ...
The locate command looks at the database that updatedb generates nightly out of a cron job. The user that updatedb runs as probably doesn't have permission to list the contents of the /etc/init.d/ directory. -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu, fs at suave.net | $ x 16 Full-time WPI Network Tech, Part time Linux/Perl guy | Just don't make the '9' format pack/unpack numbers... :-) -- Larry Wall in <199710091434.HAA00838@wall.org>
Frank Sweetser wrote:
So now, I am at a loss as to why locate could not find /etc/rc.d/boot.local
The locate command looks at the database that updatedb generates nightly out of a cron job. The user that updatedb runs as probably doesn't have permission to list the contents of the /etc/init.d/ directory.
Made sense to me then, like a fool, I tried running updatedb as root and then, in belt-and-suspenders mode, I tried updatedb --localuser=root but still got only the boot.local in /etc/init.d :-( I guess this is why you let sleeping dougs lie doug
I did a locate boot.local and got back only /etc/init.d/boot.local
(I tried this on five machines here running SusE 7.2 and they all showed just one copy)
However, just to be sure, I went to /etc/rc.d and a ls -al gave me that boot.local you describe!
Hi Doug, The reason that /etc/init.d/boot.local and /etc/rc.d/boot.local are the same file is because /etc/rc.d is a link to /etc/init.d on my SuSE 7.2 PRO system. linuxpc> ls -ald /etc/rc.d lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 6 Mar 24 2001 /etc/rc.d -> init.d Later, Andy -- Andy Stewart Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA, USA http://www.wlug.org
The reason that /etc/init.d/boot.local and /etc/rc.d/boot.local are the same file is because /etc/rc.d is a link to /etc/init.d on my SuSE 7.2 PRO system.
linuxpc> ls -ald /etc/rc.d lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 6 Mar 24 2001 /etc/rc.d -> init.d
Been there, done that :-) Actually, I tried root@233p5:/ > ls -al /etc/init.d/boot.local -rwxr--r-- 1 root root 447 Jan 30 16:37 /etc/init.d/boot.local root@233p5:/ > ls -al /etc/rc.d/boot.local -rwxr--r-- 1 root root 447 Jan 30 16:37 /etc/rc.d/boot.local | |____________________ | and found that both had the number 1 where I expected 2. I then went back to an old UNIX manual and did some more reading :-) and tried root@233p5:/ > ls -il /etc/init.d/boot.local 274722 -rwxr--r-- 1 root root 447 Jan 30 16:37 /etc/init.d/boot.local root@233p5:/ > ls -il /etc/rc.d/boot.local 274722 -rwxr--r-- 1 root root 447 Jan 30 16:37 /etc/rc.d/boot.local and, miracles still happen, got the same inodes for both files. So it looks like we have a hard link. However, we still have 1 and not 2 :-) I notice you have the same "disease" I then wondered whether SuSE was doing something odd. I therefore went to /tmp and, as root, created two subdirectories z1 and z2. I then cat'd /etc/fstab to z1/test1 to create a file. I finally created a hard link from z2/test1 to z1/test1. When I now did a ls -il on those two test1 files, there were 2's where they should be! At this point, Chuck suggested I do a forced fsck. I had some trouble at first (until he showed me I had to remount / ro; I had tried the SuSE rescue system but it complained about bad superblocks and/or odd "magic numbers". This happened on three boxes so I was unconvinced there was a screwed up file system on all three machines). I have just now finished that fsck -f /dev/hda7 on my notebook and all it reports is 0.2% non-contiguous --- as I suspected from the problem on three boxes (or 4, if we include yours) no screwed up file system. So the mystery now is why do we both get 1 for those linked files. doug filesystem.
On Sat, Feb 16, 2002 at 12:02:40PM -0500, doug waud wrote:
I then went back to an old UNIX manual and did some more reading :-) and tried
root@233p5:/ > ls -il /etc/init.d/boot.local 274722 -rwxr--r-- 1 root root 447 Jan 30 16:37 /etc/init.d/boot.local root@233p5:/ > ls -il /etc/rc.d/boot.local 274722 -rwxr--r-- 1 root root 447 Jan 30 16:37 /etc/rc.d/boot.local
and, miracles still happen, got the same inodes for both files. So it looks like we have a hard link. However, we still have 1 and not 2 :-)
Aha - there's the confusion. There's no problem here - boot.local only has one directory entry (aka hardlink) pointing to it. /etc/init.d/ is a directory which contains a directory entry that maps the name boot.local to inum 274722. /etc/rc.d/ is *not* a directory, but rather a symlink. symlinks do not contain any information about that to which they point except the name, so it has no idea if it's pointing to a file, directory, dev entry, etc. So, when /etc/rc.d/foobar is opened, the symlink is hit and replaced with the contents of it's target -> /etc/init.d/foobar, and the entry foobar is looked up in the directory /etc/init.d/ Make sense? -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu, fs at suave.net | $ x 16 Full-time WPI Network Tech, Part time Linux/Perl guy | Tactical? TACTICAL!?!? Hey, buddy, we went from kilotons to megatons several minutes ago. We don't need no stinkin' tactical nukes. (By the way, do you have change for 10 million people?) --lwall
doug waud wrote: too much :-) I thought I was writing to Andy and somehow wasted everyone's time Meanwhile, Frank Sweetser has summarized the situation well. doug
participants (4)
-
Andy Stewart -
doug waud -
Frank Sweetser -
Gregory Avedissian