Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:55:52 -0600 (MDT) From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: kostikbel@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /etc/rc.d location Message-ID: <20080604.225552.74744301.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20080604095356.GC63348@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <20080604095356.GC63348@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Subject: /etc/rc.d location Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 12:53:56 +0300 > Hi, > > according to the hier(7), /etc directory contain system configuration > files and scripts. I had an experience with old systems where /etc > contained binaries for the system management, most of them now supply > only symlinks in the /etc. AFAIR, HP-UX from 10.x moved the startup > scripts from /etc into /sbin. I like this approach. > > For us, moving /etc/rc, /etc/rc.d, /etc/rc.subr and similar files from > /etc to /sbin (?) have the following benefits: > 1. Standard update procedures, both installworld and any binary upgrade > may treat the startup scripts as the usual system component. Now we > rely on the mergemaster, that have to provide special support for > /etc/rc.d at least. > 2. I believe we consider user modifications to the rc.subr and /etc/rc.d > in the same way as the modifications for the sources of the buildable > binaries. Putting it away from /etc mean that /etc is fully controlled > by the user instead of the user/system mix. > 3. System provisioning (I am sorry for possibly marketroid term, but > it is how it called there) becomes simpler, since we would have clean > separation of the invariant part and locally changed part on the > level of directories. > Compatibility, at the first look, may be handled by the symlinks, as > usual. This is a very interesting thought. I'm not sure that /sbin is the right place to put them. They aren't needed for normal system operations and may interfere with user's operations. My knee jerk reaction is 'no'. But my more reasoned one might be 'that's not a horrible idea.' I'm sure there's lots of implciations that I've not thought of, however. > Now, having the VCS that makes moving files around not so prohibitely > costly, I think the topic may be discussed. Obviously, I am not the > person who actually understand the rc, and my proposal is only proposal > to bring it to consideration in the case this appears to not be a > nonsense for some rc@ master. Just because we can copy files, doesn't mean we must. :-) Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080604.225552.74744301.imp>