Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:08:44 +0200
From:      Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
To:        Brad Knowles <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org>
Cc:        sthaug@nethelp.no
Subject:   Re: RFC: Alternate patch to have true new-style rc.d scripts 	in ports(without touching localpkg)
Message-ID:  <4122116C.8010409@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <p06002015bd47bfc7dd15@[10.0.1.2]>
References:  <200408170822.32183.jhandvil@tampabay.rr.com> <61422.1092748299@bizet.nethelp.no> <p06002015bd47bfc7dd15@[10.0.1.2]>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 3:11 PM +0200 2004-08-17, sthaug@nethelp.no wrote:
> 
>>  - Why cannot /usr/local/etc/rc.d be used with rcorder if /etc/rc.d/local
>>  is okay?
> 
>     You can't guarantee that /usr/local is on the same filesystem as 
> /etc (and available early in the boot process), and while you can't 
> guarantee that /etc/rc.d/local is also on the same filesytem, it's a lot 
> easier for some people to guarantee.
> 
>     Moreover, many sites may mount /usr read-only, or /usr/local non-suid.

So?  How does this prevent rc scripts being used from /usr or /usr/local?

-- 
Andre



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4122116C.8010409>