From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 17 14:51:41 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 97AEF16A4CE for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:51:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from www.ideaway.net (ideaway.net [207.251.107.200]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F0EA43D1F for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:51:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mspam@www.ideaway.net) Received: from www.ideaway.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id i7HEpbq29936 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:51:37 -0400 From: "Mike" To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 09:51:37 -0500 Message-Id: <20040817145137.M47203@www.ideaway.net> X-Mailer: Open WebMail 1.81 20021203 X-OriginatingIP: 128.2.134.162 (mferdman@www.ideaway.net) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:23:40 +0000 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 14:51:41 -0000 I guess that by having enough people bring up their concerns, I am hoping that such a change will be reconsidered... Without sounding too much like a broken record - separating packages from the base into a different partition is an asset I would much rather not loose. I believe many people have made a coherent enough argument that I wholehearedly agree with, but I'd just also like to add something I haven't seen (perhaps missed). I have a setup where an old slow NIS/NFS server provides a combination of /usr/local, /home, and swap for a bunch of even slower machines. The beauty of this setup is that as long as the software installed in /usr/local is built for the lowest common denominator processor (all are obviously x86) everything just works. And it works well. The scripts that run from /usr/local/etc/rc.d run exactly as expected, on all machines, and I am happy to only change them in one place to have the whole farm "just work". In all this, there is but one kludge - the dhcpd startup script just exits if run on any host other than the one hardcoded in the script. I would imagine that this setup is not unique to me - but it relies on having the startup scripts in /usr/local/etc/rc.d; I gladly accept criticism on this (e.g. this setup is dumb, here's a better way to do it) or explanations why startup scritps for packages in /etc will not break the setup above. But please don't offer me to also start NFS mounting /etc/local; /var/db/pkg is already annoying enough. Mike