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>