From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 31 12:23:56 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB5B116A4CE; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:23:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fillmore.dyndns.org (port-212-202-50-15.dynamic.qsc.de [212.202.50.15]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A47443D41; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:23:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com) Received: from dhcp-14.local ([172.16.0.14] helo=dhcp-11.local) by fillmore.dyndns.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1Bqstv-000NdE-CU; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 14:23:49 +0200 Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 14:25:06 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482) To: "Rob MacGregor" From: Oliver Eikemeier In-Reply-To: <200407311019.i6VAJsVs031900@the-macgregors.org> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9 cc: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: Alternate patch to have true new-style rc.d scripts inports (without touching localpkg) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:23:56 -0000 Rob MacGregor wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Oliver Eikemeier [mailto:eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com] >> >> Nope, only two kinds of scripts will be run: old-style scripts with a >> `.sh' extension, and new-style rc.d scripts without extension. So you >> should not run into an trouble with scripts renamed to `.old' or >> `.disabled', except when you got into the habit to *remove* the >> extension to disable the scripts. > > Ok, I'm confused (but then I haven't had my coffee yet). > > You're saying that any script ending in .sh is assumed to be an old > style one > and processed that way. You're also saying that anything else is > assumed to > be a new style script, correct? No, only scripts without any extension are assumed to be new-style rc.d. Everthing else is ignored. > However, then you say that renaming scripts (new or old?) will be fine, > as > long as you rename them to .old or .disabled - anything else will still > be run > as if it's a new style script? No, I propose that you ignore everthing that has a extension (a dot in its filename), except `.sh' scripts, which are considered to be old-style. > I just want to ensure that I don't get bit by this when it goes live :) Yup. It will be documented then. -Oliver