Don Lewis wrote:
>
> On Sep 9, 12:05am, Matthew Thyer wrote:
> } Subject: Re: /usr/local/etc/rc.d and /etc/rc.d
> } Neil Blakey-Milner wrote:
>
> } > I'd prefer a dependency based system. (cf. Eivind Eklund's newrc, at
> } > http://people.FreeBSD.org/~eivind/newrc.tar.gz)
>
> How does this compare with what NetBSD implemented?
>
> } I haven't looked at this yet but off the top of my head, a dependency
> } based system sounds overly complicated (consider ports authors) and
> } unecessarily different from other systems.
>
> NetBSD switched to a dependency based system a while back. Judging by
> the traffic on their mail lists, it was somewhat controversial ...
I'd consider it overly complicated because:
- The OS vendor can work out the correct order for system component
startup and set the numbers right once per release so who needs
the overhead and complexity of a dependency based system ?
- The ports collection is so huge these days that we need to make it
easier rather than harder for non-hardcore FreeBSD users to
submit and maintain their own ports. Its already hard enough to
do a port right especially if it should have ifdefs on the version
of FreeBSD to work correctly in -STABLE and -CURRENT. Port authors
really need -CURRENT and -STABLE installed and maintain a copy of the
repository to DTRT.
- The SysV style number based system is fine in that port authors can
all use the same number (say S50myport) unless it needs to be changed
due to the unlikely need for ordering (remember we haven't had
ordering
to date and there are ~3700 ports).
- Dont think of /usr/local/etc/rc.d being just for the ports collection,
people will put there own startup scripts there too and will find it
very easy to just pick the right numbers ala SysV.
I do admin SysV systems of all types (mainly Solaris, HPUX, IRIX, True64
- yes I work for Defence) as my paid job so I know how easy the number
order system is to use.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
