Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 03:40:50 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: new rc.network6 and rc.firewall6 Message-ID: <14837.19218.317368.924510@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <20001023175332.B29365@electricjellyfish.net> References: <20001022153957.A4742@dragon.nuxi.com> <Pine.LNX.4.10.10010240445540.23970-100000@inet.ssc.nsu.ru> <20001023175332.B29365@electricjellyfish.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garrett Rooney writes: > On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:49:40AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > Well, would not be this stepping aside from BSD startup sequence, which we > > all know and love? Having dozens of small files instead of pair of > > big ones always frustrates me when I have to work with linux. > and at the very least, with a number of smaller files, assuming they're > named well, you can find what you're looking for faster, and not have > to dig though the one monolithic script to find out how sometihng is > working. Well, we *already* have over a dozen /etc/rc.* files on -current. And we *don't* have the advantage of a consistent interface to control all the functions in /etc/rc. If you break things up, then if you need to restart the mail server, just go "/etc/rc.d/sendmail restart". dhcpd? "/etc/rc.d/sendmail/dhcpd restart". Etc. Of course, for consistency ports should be tweaked to use have the same provides/requires setup, and use rc.subr instead of the homegrown hacks. Which brings up the real downside of doing this - you have to parse rc.subr and rc.conf for *every* one of those scripts. <mike To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14837.19218.317368.924510>