From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Oct 18 10:19:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from buffoon.automagic.org (buffoon.automagic.org [208.185.30.208]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CF35937B403 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 10:19:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 99910 invoked by uid 1000); 18 Oct 2001 17:19:45 -0000 Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 13:19:45 -0400 From: Joe Abley To: Gordon Tetlow Cc: arch@freebsd.org, kevin.way@overtone.org Subject: Re: New rc.d init script roadmap Message-ID: <20011018131944.O92370@buffoon.automagic.org> References: <20011018091927.A18621@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 09:46:13AM -0700, Gordon Tetlow wrote: > I just looked briefly at it. I think we are actually in about the same > place, although he's a bit further along on the scripts. Although most of > them are directly from NetBSD and not a conversion of the existing FreeBSD > boot scripts/order. If you need a volunteer to port the existing /etc/rc.* to rc.d bits, my hand is up. If you have enough eyes on that already, however, I am happy to remain quiet :) > There is one main issue to resolve before I go through and rewrite the > rc.d scripts. Do we want to keep the existing FreeBSD scripts as much as > possible? or do we want them to look like NetBSD's? I prefer the former > myself. I think Kevin's implementation has gone more for the latter. I think the former is more likely to result in scripts that exactly match the current functionality. Joe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message