Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 20:20:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White <dwhite@gumbysoft.com> To: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> Cc: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Subject: Re: _<service> users [Was: startup error for pflogd] Message-ID: <20040623201914.B92305@carver.gumbysoft.com> In-Reply-To: <200406230114.19277.max@love2party.net> References: <20040620134437.P94503@fw.reifenberger.com> <20040622155106.C79584@carver.gumbysoft.com> <200406230114.19277.max@love2party.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Max Laier wrote: > > I think its quite doable for 6.x; this gives ports a chance to get on > > board without having a huge rush before 5.3 hits the street. > > I completely agree with you here. My question is, what should I do with > pflogd? I don't see much point in creating user pflogd now, patching pflogd > to use it and revert everything back for 6-current. So will it be much of a > problem to add _pflogd now eventhough the rest of the daemons is not yet > converted? Well, everything else is going to have to get patched too, so pflogd will just ride the megacommit. :-) How many places is the username referenced in the code? I wouldn't think it would pop up more than a couple of times. -- Doug White | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve dwhite@gumbysoft.com | www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040623201914.B92305>