Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:09:25 -0500 From: Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com> To: Jan Srzednicki <w@expro.pl> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Re: RFC: Alternate patch to have true new-style rc.d scripts in ports (without touching localpkg) Message-ID: <790a9fff0408170809f006b57@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20040817080812.GF37212@miranda.expro.pl> References: <20040816155653.GA2405@rogue.acs-et.com> <20040817080812.GF37212@miranda.expro.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:08:12 +0200, Jan Srzednicki <w@expro.pl> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 01:10:09AM +0200, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > > Mike Makonnen wrote: > > > > >I have thought about this considerably, and I think the best solution > > >is to have ports rc.d scripts installed to /etc/rc.d. > > > > This is what I currently do with slapd, but this approach has multiple > > problems: > > > > - it violates the law that packages have to be PREFIX-clean, which has > > some very unfortunate consequences from a packaging point of view. > > Indeed, unfortunately. > > > - mergemaster barfs ever time (PR 64476) > > That's why my suggestion would be: /etc/rc.d/local/ (or > /etc/rc.d/ports/, or whatever you want to call it). In this way you can > easily separate both directories, and as new-style ports rc-scripts have > to be placed in the new location, there is absolutely no confusion about > them. Old scripts in /usr/local/etc/rc.d would be run with localpkg as > they have been before. > Except this breaks for people who are NFS mounting /usr/local from another machine, as the startup scripts are on the machine where the port was originally installed, instead on in local/etc/rc.d. Which is one of the purposes of putting them into local/etc/rc.d in the first place. Scot
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?790a9fff0408170809f006b57>