From owner-freebsd-rc@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 16 08:51:27 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E07CF106564A; Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:51:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mtm@wubethiopia.com) Received: from dire.wubethiopia.com (j071.v.rootbsd.net [208.79.82.223]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB5CE8FC12; Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:51:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mtm@wubethiopia.com) Received: from rogue.mike.lan (unknown [213.55.69.231]) by dire.wubethiopia.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 371704FD996B; Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:51:11 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <48562AAD.90900@wubethiopia.com> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 11:56:13 +0300 From: Mike Makonnen User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080323) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Barton References: <200806090907.m5997wwM043284@svn.freebsd.org> <86hcc2vjnv.fsf@ds4.des.no> <484E2E05.5080804@wubethiopia.com> <485179C8.9090802@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <485179C8.9090802@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: =?UTF-8?B?RGFnLUVybGluZyBTbcO4cmdyYXY=?= , src-committers@freebsd.org, freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r179669 - head/sbin/rcorder 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: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:51:28 -0000 Doug Barton wrote: > Mike Makonnen wrote: >> [ cc'ing -rc ] >> >> Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: >>> Mike Makonnen writes: >>>> Document the misleading nature of the REQUIRE line. The patch in >>>> the PR has been heavily edited for style(9) and clarity. Mistakes >>>> are >>>> mine. >>> >>> How about s/REQUIRE/AFTER/, to mirror BEFORE? >> >> I would be in favor of that. Any objections? > > In some ways I think this would be a good change, although I confess I > have a yellow warning light in the "possibly gratuitous change" > column. My preference would be that we ask the netbsd guys about this > before we do it, either so that they can consider doing it also, or to > warn us about why it would be a bad idea. It may seem gratuitous, but on the other hand if it prevents misunderstandings of the kind that spawned this thread in the first place, then I think it's worth doing. As far as NetBSD is concerned we can have compatibility by simply *not* removing support for "REQUIRED". We can simply list it as supported but deprecated in the documentation. Cheers. -- Mike Makonnen | GPG-KEY: http://people.freebsd.org/~mtm/mtm.asc mtm @ FreeBSD.Org | AC7B 5672 2D11 F4D0 EBF8 5279 5359 2B82 7CD4 1F55 FreeBSD | http://www.freebsd.org