From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Jan 30 02:03:57 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA08362 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 02:03:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from peach.ocn.ne.jp (peach.ocn.ne.jp [210.145.254.87]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA08350 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 02:03:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dcs@newsguy.com) Received: from newsguy.com by peach.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN) id TAA25084; Sat, 30 Jan 1999 19:03:30 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <36B2CD01.69CFEFA8@newsguy.com> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 18:12:33 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: pt-BR,ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brandon Gillespie CC: Robert Withrow , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: more modular rc/init/uninit system... References: <36B1739E.1A22A983@urc.ac.ru> <199901291406.JAA27108@spooky.rwwa.com> <19990129115122.A25989@cold.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Brandon Gillespie wrote: > > Following the idea of just modularizing the executable part of > /etc/rc*, there are two options: 1) make Yet Another Standard, or > 2. follow an existing and widely accepted standard, at least loosely. > > I believe 2. to be the better option, and thus suggested putting the > scripts in /sbin/init.d and /sbin/rc.d (symlinked to init.d). > Furthermore, as I stated in the web page the scripts *should not be > changed* The only role they play is _order_. Whether something runs > or not is managed by the config script. Because of this the admin > should really _never_ have to touch the symlinks (unless they are > making something new). SYSV way is confusing. More than that, SYSV is a *hack*. While it may do whatever it was supposed to do, it's deficiencies make clear that it was, at best, a good first try. I don't see why we have to stick to a hack just because it was the first implementation tried. FreeBSD's way is good, though it simply does not try to solve some of the problems SYSV way tries to. If we are going to change the *GOOD WAY* we do things now, we better change to *ANOTHER GOOD WAY*. SYSV way is, thus, not acceptable. > I do like the dependancy and register parts, however. The problem with dependencies is that you need to build a graph, so you know how to shutdown a service, while correctly shuting down everything that depended on it (which the service is most likely to *not* know -- take, for instance, the networking stack). -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com Would you mind not shooting at the thermonuclear weapons? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message