Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:30:51 +0100
From:      Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Is there any reason to keep sysutils/rc_subr?
Message-ID:  <20091114133051.GB35115@stack.nl>
In-Reply-To: <4AFBCBFE.6090504@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <4AFBCBFE.6090504@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:49:02AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> I'm wondering if there is any reason to keep sysutils/rc_subr around?
> In bsd.port.mk the default sub for %%RC_SUBR%% is already
> /etc/rc.subr, and all supported platforms have always had that file.

> After the release of 8.0 I'd like to do the following:
> 1. Deprecate sysutils/rc_subr
> 2. Update all ports rc.d scripts that currently use %%RC_SUBR%% to use
> /etc/rc.subr instead.
> 3. Simplify any ports Makefiles that depend on sysutils/rc_subr
> 4. Simplify bsd.port.mk

> I also think it would be reasonable to update the Handbook section on
> ports rc.d scripts to use /etc/rc.subr now.

> Any objections?

A separate rc_subr port may be useful in case new functions are added to
rc.subr, and it is desired to use these functions on systems that do not
have them in /etc/rc.subr.

-- 
Jilles Tjoelker



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091114133051.GB35115>