From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Sep 20 16:05:56 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id QAA07822
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 20 Sep 1995 16:05:56 -0700
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA07809
          ; Wed, 20 Sep 1995 16:05:52 -0700
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id QAA01795; Wed, 20 Sep 1995 16:03:21 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199509202303.QAA01795@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: ports startup scripts
To: chuckr@eng.umd.edu (Chuck Robey)
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 1995 16:03:21 -0700 (MST)
Cc: julian@ref.tfs.com, asami@cs.berkeley.edu, ports@FreeBSD.ORG,
        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950920184533.12470B-100000@cappuccino.eng.umd.edu> from "Chuck Robey" at Sep 20, 95 06:50:28 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 519       
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

> I'd really apreciate one thing.  I've noticed an extreme and virulent 
> allergy some folks have to doing the startup tasks ala SVR4 style.  I do 
> know that style.  Can one of you tell me if there's any strong reason 
> against doing things in that mode, other than simple prejudice?

It requires the implementation of run levels.

I personally *don't* find it objectionable.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.