Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:06:48 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@chello.cz> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Michael Reifenberger <mike@Reifenberger.com> Subject: Re: startup error for pflogd Message-ID: <20040621190648.GA4459@isis.wad.cz> In-Reply-To: <20040621164657.GA2544@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <20040620134437.P94503@fw.reifenberger.com> <20040620230350.O1720@fw.reifenberger.com> <20040621105114.G9108@fw.reifenberger.com> <200406211639.22243.max@love2party.net> <20040621164657.GA2544@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
# obrien@freebsd.org / 2004-06-21 09:46:57 -0700:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 04:39:10PM +0200, Max Laier wrote:
> > This might seem like OpenBSD/paranoia, but my opinion on it is: It's done so
> > why not port it over? It also helps to keep the diff down (which means less
> > work).
> >
> > If there is no resistance against "yet another user", I will add _pflogd.
>
> I would prefer just 'pflogd' until it is discussed if we want to follow
> the _<service> way.
I'd prefer the underscored kind. I remember a post on ports@ from
a guy called Cyrus complaining about the mail/cyrus* ports stealing
his login. This kind of problems can be avoided, plus there's the
benefit of easier recognition of "system" processes (daemons) from
user ones in e. g. top(1).
--
If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore
your message. see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040621190648.GA4459>