Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 08:15:02 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@sigpipe.cz> To: Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Freddie Cash <fcash@sd73.bc.ca> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: rc_subr-1.31 Message-ID: <20050614061502.GA686@isis.sigpipe.cz> In-Reply-To: <790a9fff0506131815181eed05@mail.gmail.com> References: <1118593453.383.15.camel@xris.fu41.vpn> <60869.24.71.128.63.1118603612.squirrel@imap.sd73.bc.ca> <20050613091420.GD1789@isis.sigpipe.cz> <790a9fff0506131815181eed05@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
# swhetzel@gmail.com / 2005-06-13 20:15:44 -0500:
> On 6/13/05, Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@sigpipe.cz> wrote:
> > > > Local package initialization:Starting foo.Starting bar.Starting
> > > > whatever.
> >
> > > > I think an output like:
> > >
> > > > Local package initialization: foo bar whatever.
> > >
> > > > ...without "Starting" for every service looks more professional.
> > >
> > > Personally, I prefer the "Starting service X" output better.
> > > Especially since that is what is shown when you run the RC scripts
> > > manually. I never liked the "foo" output when you ran the RC scripts
> > > manually, as it never really told you if the daemon had started,
> > > stopped, or errored out. Now, with the "Starting foo", "Stopping foo"
> > > etc, it looks more natural and is easier to understand.
> >
> > It could perhaps output "Starting foo" if called outside the system
> > startup, and " foo" otherwise.
> >
> What needs to happen is a "\n" needs to be added to "Local package
> initialization:", so that all of the "Starting foo" appears on
> seperate lines.
That looks like a terrible waste of display space when much more
could fit in a single screen.
--
How many Vietnam vets does it take to screw in a light bulb?
You don't know, man. You don't KNOW.
Cause you weren't THERE. http://bash.org/?255991
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050614061502.GA686>