From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 17 02:21:17 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 0A2C316A41F for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:21:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mail2.fluidhosting.com [204.14.90.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 19B1643D62 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:21:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 48763 invoked by uid 399); 17 Dec 2005 02:21:13 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.3?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 17 Dec 2005 02:21:12 -0000 Message-ID: <43A37617.2030406@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 18:21:11 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu 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> In-Reply-To: <20051217040348.087f1248@it.buh.tecnik93.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:21:17 -0000 Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote: > Yes, that's what I (wanted to) say. ("my" then = post-MFC, post-fix_ports). > 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. That's great, although ironically I _just_ ran into a situation where that is not the ideal way to do it. :) I am working on updating misc/compat5x to use an rc.d-style script, and tried doing it the way that you suggested, with compat5x.in. When bsd.port.mk tried to create the boot script however, I got an error because work/compat5x already existed, it was the directory in work where the tarball unpacked itself. Most of the time this is not going to be a problem, as the source directory will be versioned (like foopkg-1.2.3), but this is a corner case that should be kept in mind. For now I'm going to suggest using compat5x.sh for this particular case, it can be adjusted down the road if needed. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection