From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Aug 3 17: 9: 6 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2309E37B7E7; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 17:09:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id CAA46796; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:08:56 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA41891; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:08:56 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:08:56 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Ben Smithurst Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: rc.syscons ? In-Reply-To: <20000803172130.L80822@strontium.scientia.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Is there some reason we don't have an rc.syscons file? Much of rc.i386 > and rc.alpha seems to be identical and it would seem appropriate to > split that out into rc.syscons or something, both because it would > be cleaner and would mean less chance of someone updating one and > forgetting the other. This sounds good to me; however, I'm getting somewhat concerned about the growing number of seperate rc files in the top level of /etc... Might the time be right to consider relocating these to a second level directory? On a side note, has the issue of replacing the current rc script mechanism been rehashed lately? Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message