Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
From:      David Wolfskill <dhw@whistle.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   /etc/rc.local vs. /usr/local/etc/rc.d vs. ???
Message-ID:  <199804132216.PAA01636@pau-amma.whistle.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Maybe I need to rent a clue....

I just replaced our main NFS server with one ruuning FreeBSD 2.2.6-RELEASE.
(Old machine had been running 2.1.0-RELEASE.)

This particular machine was also running a couple of other things -- a
Web server & a samba server.

Now, we use /usr/local for site-specific (vs. machine-specific) things.

This machine exports a filesystem that most machines import as /usr/local.

We also would like to use programs &c. that are on this filesystem from
this machine's /usr/local; therefore, that filesystem also appears on
this machine as /usr/local.

However, if I put the initialization stuff for the machine-specific
servers in /usr/local/etc/rc.d, every machine on the net sees that,
and tries to start them up at boot time.

This really is not what I'd prefer to do.

So, for now, I've gone back to the (deprecated) /etc/rc.local for this
purpose.

Suggestions for ways to do this that are likely to work while keeping
some reasonable semblance of conformity to rational expectations of
How Things Ought To Be Done would be most welcome.

Thanks,
david
-- 
David Wolfskill		dhw@whistle.com	(650) 577-7158	pager: (650) 401-0168

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199804132216.PAA01636>