From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon May 20 20:13:01 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id UAA15907 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hq.icb.chel.su (icb-rich-gw.icb.chel.su [193.125.10.34]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA15869 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:12:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (babkin@localhost) by hq.icb.chel.su (8.7.5/8.6.5) id JAA08088; Tue, 21 May 1996 09:09:34 +0600 (GMT+0600) From: "Serge A. Babkin" Message-Id: <199605210309.JAA08088@hq.icb.chel.su> Subject: Re: Congrats on CURRENT 5/1 SNAP... To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:09:33 +0600 (ESD) Cc: csdayton@midway.uchicago.edu, jehamby@lightside.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199605202139.OAA28549@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at May 20, 96 02:39:50 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > > > and revamp the boot scripts to support > > > SVR4-style /etc/init.d for safer package installs. > > > > I would like to see this happen. I find it much more flexible than > > one flat file. Are there compelling reasons for keeping the current > > structure for boot scripts. > > There are compelling modular installation and packaging reasons for > *not* keepingthe current structure. > > One issue that SVR4 does not address (doesn't mean we can't) is > a read-only / (and therefore /etc) and the ability to support > drop-in per system package/daemon configurations anyway. How about the HP-UX 10 approach ? They have divided their boot scripts into 2 parts: one, the fixed is in /sbin/init.d (marked as read-only) and the tunes are in /etc/rc.config (global definitions) and /etc/rc.config.d (definitions for particular scripts). This is very like FreeBSD rc and sysconfig files but splitted. May be it is a good model ? -SB