From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 17 14:07:10 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B88F16A4CE for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:07:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B68043D76 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:07:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 35506 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2004 14:06:27 -0000 Received: from dotat.atdotat.at (HELO [62.48.0.47]) ([62.48.0.47]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 17 Aug 2004 14:06:27 -0000 Message-ID: <41221108.6010407@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:07:04 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040608 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sthaug@nethelp.no References: <200408170822.32183.jhandvil@tampabay.rr.com> <61422.1092748299@bizet.nethelp.no> In-Reply-To: <61422.1092748299@bizet.nethelp.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: jhandvil@tampabay.rr.com cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: Alternate patch to have true new-style rc.d scripts in ports(without touching localpkg) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:07:10 -0000 sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: >>I think that a better way would be to find an elegant method of >>allowing /usr/local/etc/rc.d to participate in rcorder. I've got plenty of >>ideas about how to do this without breaking the filesystem dependency, but >>I'll wait to see what -current and -hackers come up with. I am sure that >>their method will be cleaner. > > I would much prefer to keep ports out of /etc (or out of the root file > system in general). I agree with the point made by several others that > the clean separation of base system and local mods is one of the great > strengths of FreeBSD. > > Since /etc/rc.d/local (or similar) has been proposed: > > - Why cannot /usr/local/etc/rc.d be used with rcorder if /etc/rc.d/local > is okay? > > - If the argument is that /usr/local is not available: Okay, but in that > case you won't be able to start the ports anyway, since they are located > somewhere under /usr/local. Same opinion++ -- Andre