Date: Mon, 22 Mar 1999 00:39:46 +1000 From: Stephen McKay <syssgm@detir.qld.gov.au> To: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, syssgm@detir.qld.gov.au Subject: Re: Possible fix for rc.conf Message-ID: <199903211439.AAA06704@nymph.detir.qld.gov.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903210444560.52205-100000@nomad.dataplex.net> from Richard Wackerbarth at "Sun, 21 Mar 1999 04:48:05 -0600" References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903210444560.52205-100000@nomad.dataplex.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday, 21st March 1999, Richard Wackerbarth wrote: >Why do we need to have ANY of the file inclusion in /etc/defaults/rc.conf? >Shouldn't that file simply be definitions of variables? >IMHO, the "logic" should be in "rc" itself. Yeah! What he said! Having code in rc.conf sucks. If there is no logic, there can be no recursion. If you are going to mix code into rc.conf you may as well just suck it back into /etc/rc and get rid of it entirely. (*) Stephen. (*) Which is silly, of course. 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?199903211439.AAA06704>