Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:38:18 +1100 (EST) From: proff@suburbia.net To: davidn@unique.usn.blaze.net.au (David Nugent) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DEVFS permissions &c. Message-ID: <19970113013818.24081.qmail@suburbia.net> In-Reply-To: <Mutt.19970113110822.davidn@labs.blaze.net.au> from David Nugent at "Jan 13, 97 11:08:22 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Terry Lambert writes: > > > > What are the current ideas of a SysV init? :-) > > > > > > Shoot first and ask questions later? :-) > > > > > > Seriously, I've used sysv for many years, and grew to quickly despise > > > the sysv approach. It does have some good sides, but, for example, > > > Sun's tree of symlinks to init/shutdown scripts is definitely an > > > overkill. > > > > This really depends on whether you expect to install third party > > commercial software, or not, doesn't it? > > No, it is more a question of the implementation. > > I can easily imagine a simpler scheme involving a flat file of > scripts to run, in the order in which they run, for each runlevel > or even all runlevels with a flag field to determine which runlevel > each should be run. This is easily handled by a bourne shell script > and doesn't involve the bogosity of symlinks. > Regards, > > > David Nugent - Unique Computing Pty Ltd - Melbourne, Australia > Voice +61-3-9791-9547 Data/BBS +61-3-9792-3507 3:632/348@fidonet > davidn@freebsd.org davidn@blaze.net.au http://www.blaze.net.au/~davidn/ > I agree. Have you ever looked at a solaris rc tree? Very ugly. Apart from atomic startup/shutdown scripts, there is another important reason to have a sysv style init. Programs crash, and should be restarted when they crash, but not blindly, and this is where sysv init overcycling rules come into play. In terms of atomic third party software installation, I would by far prefer separate package nests of /opt/package/{bin,man,info,etc} than the current "throw it all into one basket" and goto ridiculous extremes in trying to work out which belongs to what with package managers. PATH, MANPATH, INFOPATH et al was invented for a reason. Adoption of my pseudo env-fs would be a good start for atomic management of environmental variables. Cheers, Julian <proff@iq.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970113013818.24081.qmail>