Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 31 Oct 2002 20:59:24 -0800
From:      "David O'Brien" <dev-null@NUXI.com>
To:        Tim Kientzle <kientzle@acm.org>
Cc:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: RCng Awkwardness
Message-ID:  <20021101045924.GA80782@dragon.nuxi.com>
In-Reply-To: <3DC03815.2050003@acm.org>
References:  <3DC03815.2050003@acm.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:50:45AM -0800, Tim Kientzle wrote:
> I find the standard arguments used by RCng quite
> awkward.  In particular, especially for people who
> have worked with SysV-style init scripts, it's

We aren't trying to be compatable with SysV.  We are compatable with
other BSD's with an RCng deployment.

> I would find it vastly more intuitive if the
> current arguments were named differently:
> 
> current 'start'  ->  new 'boot'
> current 'stop'  -> new 'shutdown'
> current 'forcestart' -> new 'start'
> current 'forcestop' -> new 'stop'

No thank you.  This would be a gratitious change from the existing BSD
prior art.

> This better reflects the actual usage:
> the current 'start' and 'stop' are really
> intended to be used by RC at system boot
> and shutdown time.

No, they are also used by sysadmins wanting to cycle a service.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021101045924.GA80782>