[patch] rc.d cleanup

Hi there, This is my first patch to this project. This is the first of many patches to come actually, but I need to find a sponsor to guide me, and review what I submit. The patch is kinda big, and far reaching in terms of altering almost every rc.d script. This patch effects most of the rc.d scr

Re: [patch] rc.d cleanup

> Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >> On 2005-08-01 13:55, John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >On Monday 01 August 2005 01:29 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> This patch effects most of the rc.d scripts that utilize simple IF >> >> statements, converting them to logical AND/OR's instead. For exam

Re: [patch] rc.d cleanup

> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote this message on Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:29 > -0500: >> This has the result of reducing the size of the shell code, and reducing > > Unless you cross a fs frag (usually 1024 bytes), i.e. reduce the scripts > by an average of 512bytes *per* script, you will see no disk space

Re: [patch] rc.d cleanup

> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>>Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >>> >>> > [...] > >>>Thirded. I far prefer the bigger C-like if statements and think this >>>patch is a huge code churn for what is basically code obfuscation. >>> >>>Cheers, >>>Maxime >>> >>> >> >> >>Well I certainly respect the op

rcorder cache (was [patch] rc.d cleanup)

> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 09:47:54PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote this message on Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 12:29 >> > -0500: >> >> This has the result of reducing the size of the shell code, and >> reducing >> > >> > Unless you cross a fs frag (usually 1024 bytes), i.e.

[patch] rc.d/tmp (silly mkdir usage)

Howdy hackers, I'm sorry for the previous patch, so here is at least one item that really bugs me that isn't obfuscation. In short, I don't see any reason to fork some process to simply "touch" a file (is a filesystem writable) when built-in shell i/o does this: --- /etc/rc.d/tmp.orig Mon Aug 1

Re: [patch] rc.d/tmp (silly mkdir usage)

All the while I point to code example of this exact same usage being deployed in the system already, and in the same exact situation. I see no reason why you must bikeshed on this. Correctness is always correct, despite established bad'ism, and in this case I am carefull to use an already approved

Re: [patch] rc.d/tmp (silly mkdir usage)

> On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:37:05PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Howdy hackers, >> >> I'm sorry for the previous patch, so here is at least one item that >> really >> bugs me that isn't obfuscation. In short, I don't see any reason to fork >> some process to simply "touch" a file (is a files