From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 19 08:43:03 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: FreeBSD-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E9916A41B for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:43:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swhetzel@gmail.com) Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.186]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7734613C469 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:43:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swhetzel@gmail.com) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id b2so1333333nfb for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 00:42:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=IVJQ+21BpkUS9PluVsk+WC1RJ8r5Co+rIiPhVNV6qqA=; b=RLgCETiSmx5OSrcpV3dhh3udZ/6ORKXfEE407DAYCFPFwPZIe5cX4bpbK+Fo4bg8ly2zgq+G5UdCUTJnjf988c1GFyHIzyclfExAoLWIY+lDPX9Z19Aiy4o5UUhjZo16QBx87fXu7B5kkV55d7yAT85QxbuH+6c7VE4xUHwdmN0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=LulW+7piGQ2GpFG9fzfVM9oY341n4AooIPc6ApN1Qc265t/lHUHmargqOcXjrG72VXj4ycELDoBOjMGCLV5SaKYIXIPSVkauUx6qfvFyviHj6z8+Pe2RZYJfKEioc4Y0GkEwXYsR7mfYO/l4LZ0wyM4l3WS7BJEUlbgiWPU/x0s= Received: by 10.86.49.13 with SMTP id w13mr4832610fgw.1195461771096; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 00:42:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.3.20 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Nov 2007 00:42:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <790a9fff0711190042x73cd231cqbd643c39be2bd767@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 02:42:51 -0600 From: "Scot Hetzel" To: "Chuck Robey" In-Reply-To: <20071119031336.GA73804@k7.mavetju> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4740E430.9050901@chuckr.org> <20071119031336.GA73804@k7.mavetju> Cc: FreeBSD-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports modifying system setups X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 08:43:04 -0000 On 11/18/07, Edwin Groothuis wrote: > On Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 08:17:36PM -0500, Chuck Robey wrote: > > activate the port, and if so, the port would add a line of the form > > 'portname_enable="YES"', and this would make your new port operate. > > Well, it seems from what I see of my new system, that this is no longer > > the case. I could understand (and approve of) ports not being allowed > > to modify any /etc/contents, but howcome ports can't use this rather > > obvious workaround? > > I don't recall this behavior at all, I think you're confused with > the messages which ports print at the end of the install-phase which > say "Add 'foo_enable="YES"'" to your /etc/rc.conf to enable this > port. > Edwin is correct that ports never had this behavior when they were converted to the rc_ng startup script style, they always required the system administrator to set the appropriate rc variable in /etc/rc.conf. Before rc_ng some scripts would automatically start on a reboot, while others required copying the *.sh{-dist,-default,...} startup script to one without the extentsion, as well as setting the execute bit. This is probably what you are remembering. Scot