From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Apr 27 16:55:49 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA06242
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 27 Apr 1997 16:55:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nic.follonett.no (nic.follonett.no [194.198.43.10])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA06234
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun, 27 Apr 1997 16:55:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from eivind@localhost) by nic.follonett.no (8.8.5/8.8.3) id BAA14541; Mon, 28 Apr 1997 01:52:31 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@nic.follonett.no>
Message-Id: <199704272352.BAA14541@nic.follonett.no>
Subject: Re: /etc/netstart bogons..
To: witr@rwwa.com (Robert Withrow)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 01:52:31 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199704271429.KAA02892@spooky.rwwa.com> from Robert Withrow at "Apr 27, 97 10:29:56 am"
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by hub.freebsd.org id QAA06235
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> ccsanady@nyx.pr.mcs.net said:
> :- And the two-digit prefix?  These are no more than a hack aimed at
> :- solving the dependancy problem
> 
> I've often tought about *that* part.  I think that it would be better
> if the individual rc scripts would provide *shell functions* to 
> start, stop, etc.

Why shell functions instead of parameters?  Parameters make it much easier
to use the scripts interactively.

>  It would also provide a declaration section that would
> define which things the package *requires*.  You could then tsort the
> total list of dependencies (from an outer *control* script) and execute
> the appropriate functions in the required order.

This is a very good idea.  However, it can also be done using start/stop
parameters.

> I *hate* the stupid ``run-levels'' symlink stuff.

I hate the symlinks.  I've not yet found out whether there is a real need
for runlevels (I certainly don't seem need it), but symlinking priorities is
evil incarnate.  If we want to support runlevels under your proposal, we can
do it by just having a file listing daemons to start at each level - much
nicer.

It would be nice if the code automatically detected what daemons to stop
and start for switching runlevel, instead of just starting all, as it does
in at least RedHat.  This would probably fit better with perl than sh,
though.  (I tried, and sh started to crumble under my fingers...)

Eivind.