From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 18 17:23:22 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94DB616A41F; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 17:23:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from flz@xbsd.org) Received: from smtp.xbsd.org (xbsd.org [82.233.2.192]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4096043D5F; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 17:23:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from flz@xbsd.org) Received: from localhost (localhost.xbsd.org [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.xbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4C4E11B6F; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:23:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.xbsd.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (srv1.xbsd.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 89193-01; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:23:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from cream.xbsd.org (cream.xbsd.org [192.168.42.6]) by smtp.xbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3731311B6B; Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:23:12 +0100 (CET) From: Florent Thoumie To: Doug Barton In-Reply-To: <43A37617.2030406@FreeBSD.org> References: <43A33C0E.9050100@FreeBSD.org> <20051217000418.GC851@zaphod.nitro.dk> <43A35FA5.4050202@FreeBSD.org> <20051217031024.60912c94@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36C4F.4010005@FreeBSD.org> <20051217034304.5ed69ef1@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A36F14.1050804@FreeBSD.org> <20051217040348.087f1248@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <43A37617.2030406@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-sRaF1mfhnYRQC1xjXagN" Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 18:23:11 +0100 Message-Id: <1134926591.744.4.camel@cream.xbsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at xbsd.org Cc: freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.org, "Simon L. Nielsen" Subject: Re: Should etc/rc.d/ike move to ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion related to /etc/rc.d design and implementation." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 17:23:22 -0000 --=-sRaF1mfhnYRQC1xjXagN Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 18:21 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: >=20 > > Yes, that's what I (wanted to) say. ("my" then =3D post-MFC, post-fix_p= orts). > > Pav's PR will get us support for this in bsd.port.mk, the rest is > > fixing the ports to be rc.d compatible and repo-copies. >=20 > That's great, although ironically I _just_ ran into a situation where tha= t=20 > is not the ideal way to do it. :) I am working on updating misc/compat5x= to=20 > use an rc.d-style script, and tried doing it the way that you suggested,=20 > with compat5x.in. When bsd.port.mk tried to create the boot script howeve= r,=20 > I got an error because work/compat5x already existed, it was the director= y=20 > in work where the tarball unpacked itself. Most of the time this is not=20 > going to be a problem, as the source directory will be versioned (like=20 > foopkg-1.2.3), but this is a corner case that should be kept in mind. >=20 > For now I'm going to suggest using compat5x.sh for this particular case, = it=20 > can be adjusted down the road if needed. FWIW, I like having .sh.in instead of .in because you=20 immediately know that it's a startup script, and it's not that=20 hard to remove a .sh suffix in shell. --=20 Florent Thoumie flz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer --=-sRaF1mfhnYRQC1xjXagN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBDpZr/MxEkbVFH3PQRAlNdAJ42zhDCjfQrDDm7DYjePbL9nqx/hACfX5he SpdETdJ1/hjwysaNzsIiJnI= =QiNz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-sRaF1mfhnYRQC1xjXagN--