From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Feb 3 03:42:11 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA16275 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 03:42:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from nomad.dataplex.net (nomad.dataplex.net [208.2.87.8]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id DAA16270 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 03:42:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rkw@dataplex.net) Received: from localhost (rkw@localhost) by nomad.dataplex.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id FAA03957; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 05:41:58 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rkw@dataplex.net) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 05:41:58 -0600 (CST) From: Richard Wackerbarth To: "Daniel J. O'Connor" cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: more modular rc/init/uninit system... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 3 Feb 1999, Daniel J. O'Connor wrote: > On 02-Feb-99 Richard Wackerbarth wrote: > > Let me suggest that we "indirect" the script files one level (ala > > autoconfig). > > For each package, we create .rc which has the guts of the scripts > > and the dependancies. When we add, delete, or change a package, we rerun > > the startup configurer which rewrites the actual scripts as needed. > Hmm.. I don't really see what it gains you. It allows us: A package definition file that doesn't change when another package is added. To generate a script which does not require "make"-like complexity at startup run time. To use a "language" that is friendlier than that of "sh" ... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message