From owner-freebsd-current Tue May 9 9:12:54 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from po4.wam.umd.edu (po4.wam.umd.edu [128.8.10.166]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70F8F37B7F9; Tue, 9 May 2000 09:12:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from culverk@wam.umd.edu) Received: from rac5.wam.umd.edu (root@rac5.wam.umd.edu [128.8.10.145]) by po4.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA14146; Tue, 9 May 2000 12:12:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rac5.wam.umd.edu (sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rac5.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA12810; Tue, 9 May 2000 12:12:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (culverk@localhost) by rac5.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA12788; Tue, 9 May 2000 12:12:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: rac5.wam.umd.edu: culverk owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 12:12:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth Wayne Culver To: Doug Barton Cc: Tony Finch , kris@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: rc.d startup scripts In-Reply-To: <3917B652.9C925B0F@gorean.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > > > Just curious, but wouldn't this be FreeSVR4??? :-) > > I'm going to assume that the smiley means you're joking, but I hope > that we can stick to discussing this plan on its merits, rather than > rejecting it out of hand because it's like something that someone else > is doing. > Yeah, I was just joking, I kinda like some things about SVR4, but I still think it would be nice to keep the option of using some of the regular rc scripts that we have now. Imagine the confusion of the people that have ONLY used FreeBSD when they go in and see rc.d and all it's scripts. Personally I kinda like the rc.d stuff better myself, but I'm just thinking about the average user. Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message