rc.news: checking whether we run as the news user

[Julien ÉLIE]

Hi Noel,

> I think the issue here is rc.news is wrongly named, since most sys
> admins would see that and say, oh ok, that goes in (or links to)
> /etc/rc.d or /etc/<insert_your_os's_init_dir> and call it as rc.news
> start|stop|restart  etc, but clearly this is however not what rc.news
> is for, requiring a wrapper to call it, change to user news before
> calling that script.

How sys admins install packages?
I would expect that they use the packages provided with the distribution 
they are running.  Then the init scripts are right and rc.news is 
properly wrapped.

Otherwise, I guess the alternate method is that sys admins download the 
package from upstream, configure it, build it and install it.
Then, how can they miss the fact that rc.news should be wrapped?
It means that they do not even have a look at the INSTALL file or the 
CHECKLIST file that clearly explain how to start INN.  For instance:
     http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/software/inn/docs/checklist.html

Besides, even the rc.news script itself says that in the comment at the 
beginning of the file.



> It's also a PITA if something goes wrong,
> leaving all these sleeps and innwatches running since most sys admins
> would assume rc.news stop would actually stop everything, programmers
> sometimes need to think like sys admins, the ones who you rely on to
> install, configure, and use, your software :)

That's a genuine bug in rc.news; it had not caused much problem until 
now, and I am happy to see that this issue is fixed in INN 2.5.5.  At 
least it will no longer bother sys admins of systems reporting that a 
script is still running after having stopped INN.



> Someone recently mentioned about time management in getting things
> running, usually if something doesn't work after an hour or two of
> effort from start to end-user usable, I piss it off and find
> something else that does, and I know I'm not alone in that mindset

I am a bit curious about how "most sys admins" install software.  As you 
speak about Apache, sendmail, postfix, dovecot, pureftpd, bind, etc., do 
"most sys admins" install these software from source?
It is not very efficient as far as time management is concerned...



> So something that
> requires minimal fuss, would be used, recommended to others when
> asked for opinions, and the software becomes more popular as word of
> mouth helps propagate it, so basically making it as easy to use as
> possible will help the newbies, not frustrate them into using
> software X instead of yours.

That's why there are several implementations of software.  As Russ says 
in a more elegant way, you have the freedom to choose the one that fits 
your need best.
It is like news readers:  there are huge differences between the 
configuration and use of Thunderbird, Windows Mail, Apple Mail, Gnus, 
slrn, tin, etc.  It is up to you to make your choice and use the one you 
prefer.  Not all of these projects have the resources (or sometimes the 
will) to perfect them to suit all various needs of flexibility and 
configuration.

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« La science consiste à passer d'un étonnement à l'autre. »
   (Aristote)