Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 00:50:11 +0000 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports modifying system setups Message-ID: <20071122005011.07bad587@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <47449199.5000403@FreeBSD.org> References: <4740E430.9050901@chuckr.org> <20071119031336.GA73804@k7.mavetju> <790a9fff0711190042x73cd231cqbd643c39be2bd767@mail.gmail.com> <47449199.5000403@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:14:17 -0800 Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > ... I have for some time wanted to add support > to rc.subr for a /usr/local/etc/rc.conf.d so that ports could install > sensible defaults for rc.conf, What's the advantage of doing that over having the the defaults in the rc.d script, which is generally what happens now for scripts installed by ports. It would allow a port to install variant defaults, but that sounds very confusing.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071122005011.07bad587>