Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 17:20:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Cyrille Lefevre <clefevre@citeweb.net> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/31058: Maintainer update: net/isc-dhcp3 - 3.0 release Message-ID: <200110060020.f960K2906322@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR ports/31058; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Cyrille Lefevre <clefevre@citeweb.net> To: Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/31058: Maintainer update: net/isc-dhcp3 - 3.0 release Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2001 02:12:54 +0200 (CEST) Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 01:10:05PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: > > > > >Number: 31058 > > >Category: ports > > >Synopsis: Maintainer update: net/isc-dhcp3 - 3.0 release > > >Originator: Cyrille Lefevre > > >Description: > > > > how about upgrading the base system dhclient ? > > > > Makefile > > PORTVERSION bumped to 3.0. > > PLIST_SUB removed. > > PKGMESSAGE added. > > targets reworked a lot. > > etc/rc.isc-dhcpd.conf.sample is not installed in the Makefile. > Is it supposed to be similar to rc.isc-dhcrelay.conf.sample? > It is mentioned in the pkg-plist, and the 'package' and 'deinstall' > targets complain somewhat loudly :) you are right, it is missing from the PR... you'll find it in attachment. > > files/isc-dhcpd.sh.sample > > enhanced a lot to read startup options from > > etc/rc.isc-dhcpd.conf. > > program and config files checking added. > > messages logged through syslog. > > Unfortunately, the config files checking is not quite correct - > the check is for the existence of config_file, while it should check > for config_path. right again and sorry fo the typo %-| > Other than that, it looks good :) > (Well, I personally do not feel quite comfortable with putting > the rc scripts settings into separate etc/rc.* files, but then > it's just me and my obsession with the single rc.conf file :) it is far more simple to maintain such separate config file that merging them in only one. the later is applicable for static things such as the system but not for dynamic things such as ports. IMHO, it would be better to put them in something like etc/rc.config.d a la HP-UX to left etc/* more clean. thanks for you review. nobody is perfect :-P Cyrille. -- Cyrille Lefevre mailto:clefevre@citeweb.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200110060020.f960K2906322>