Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 22:03:40 -0400 From: The Classiest Man Alive <ksmm@cybercom.net> To: Brandon Gillespie <brandon@cold.org>, Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /etc/netstart bogons.. Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970428020340.007096ac@cybercom.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03:23 PM 4/27/97 -0600, Brandon Gillespie wrote: >> > I think it is more a case of functionality, rather than personal >> > preference. With the rc.d/init.d approach you have more modularity, >> > and the ability to start/stop random packages in a consistent way. >> > There is also a single standard place that a vendor can throw a >> > startup script in--this is a good thing. >> >I definitely agree, I abhore the rc?.d stuff--I can never remember what is >what (especially since it has some variance depending upon the O/S). What What is it that ties us to those arcane eight-dot-three names anyway? Why can't we just have a master rc script that launches others, like network.d or filesystems.d? Sure would beat hunting through rc* files to change the startup options on your daemons. K.S.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1.5.4.32.19970428020340.007096ac>