From owner-freebsd-current Tue May 9 14:17:41 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 520E637B918; Tue, 9 May 2000 14:17:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from culverk@wam.umd.edu) Received: from rac8.wam.umd.edu (root@rac8.wam.umd.edu [128.8.10.148]) by po4.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA13124; Tue, 9 May 2000 17:17:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rac8.wam.umd.edu (sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rac8.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA26698; Tue, 9 May 2000 17:17:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (culverk@localhost) by rac8.wam.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA26694; Tue, 9 May 2000 17:17:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: rac8.wam.umd.edu: culverk owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 17:17:20 -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: <39184503.726FE713@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 > > > 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. > > What does the average user do with the rc scripts? (BTW, I'm not being > combative here, just using your letter as an opportunity...) In my > outline we would still have /etc/rc.conf[.local], which is what the > average user interacts with now. It's what happens behind the scenes > that I want to change. The way that the various services get started. > Instead of the arcane, confusing system of rc* files we have now (most > of which grew out of necessity, don't get me wrong) we would have a > system that could be used at startup, and then also used while the > system is running to upgrade and downgrade individual bits, or groups of > bits. > Well, I guess I am not an average user then. I have customized most of my rc scripts. You are right though, it seems much better to "change what goes on behind the scenes" because it took me quite a while to learn what everything we have now did, and it took me only a day or two to figure out how to use the system you describe (well the back end anyway) Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message