Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 03:43:19 -0500 (EST) From: ADRIAN Filipi-Martin <adrian@ubergeeks.com> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Dan Busarow <dan@dpcsys.com>, Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: System V init (was: Linux to be deployed in Mexican schools; Where was FreeBSD?) Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.981201033655.4238Q-100000@lorax.ubergeeks.com> In-Reply-To: <199812010743.XAA03898@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 30 Nov 1998, Matthew Dillon wrote: > Not to detract from the other threads I'm trying to push commits through, > but... oh damn, I just can't pass it up: Why not organize an RC system > based on the specification of a set of dependancies? > > For example, require a '#DEPENDS/RETURNS' line (or equivalent) in > the first 2 lines of each rc file. > > ---- some rc.xxx file ---- > #!/bin/sh > #DEPENDS(network,sendmail,...) RETURNS(atm) > # > ... > -------------------------- Hmmm, not compatable with anything else, and more complicated. Were order dependencies ever that hard to begin with? Sure someone has to read the manpages to know that portmapper needs to run before nfsd, but are we really solving any problems by having the system dynamiaclly determine that "yes, we still need to start portmapper before nfsd"? I'm not trying to pick on you in the above, but a lot of the justification for svr4 init/statt/stop has shifted towards being compatable with other systems like linux, solaris, etc. cheers, Adrian -- [ adrian@ubergeeks.com -- Ubergeeks Consulting -- http://www.ubergeeks.com/ ] 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?Pine.BSF.3.96.981201033655.4238Q-100000>