Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:54:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: Mark Santcroos <marks@ripe.net>, Doug Barton <DougB@DougBarton.net>, bsddiy@163.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: import NetBSD rc system Message-ID: <200106111854.f5BIsX728995@earth.backplane.com> References: <20010611174717.A77956@laptop.6bone.nl> <1795096378.20010611154930@163.net> <3B2484EA.B1F04812@DougBarton.net> <200106111800.f5BI0il25446@billy-club.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:In message <20010611174717.A77956@laptop.6bone.nl> Mark Santcroos writes:
:: What is the difference between the present rc scheme and the NetBSD one?
:
:The NetBSD rc scheme, in a nutshell, put each thing into its own file
:and does order dependencies automatically. Ours is one big monolithic
:beast that kinda can do extra things, but only if their order can be
:coerced into being right.
:
:Warner
I kinda like our scheme... at least I like the single monolithic
/etc/rc.conf file. It makes maintaining and installing machines
utterly trivial whereas having a billion little files each with
one or two options in them makes maintaining and installing machines
rather difficult. I sure hope nobody is advocating doing away with
the monolithic capabilities of /etc/rc.conf!
-Matt
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200106111854.f5BIsX728995>