Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 15:42:33 -0800 (PST) From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Vivek Khera <vivek@khera.org> Cc: freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Postfix and faststart Message-ID: <20060112153934.G51718@znfgre.qbhto.arg> In-Reply-To: <A9FA0EEE-AE15-4882-8293-E65CB8FE7D06@khera.org> References: <43BD2794.8020000@cnptia.embrapa.br> <43C01C75.6020504@FreeBSD.org> <43C0652D.90709@FreeBSD.org> <43C066B4.3060505@rogers.com> <43C06A2B.9030603@earthmagic.org> <43C0C6BB.1000403@FreeBSD.org> <A9FA0EEE-AE15-4882-8293-E65CB8FE7D06@khera.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Vivek Khera wrote:
>
> On Jan 8, 2006, at 3:00 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
>
>> This idea has been discussed in the past, and it has a lot of merit. I tend
>> to have a fundamental opposition to adding new pseudo-targets unless they
>> are ABSOLUTELY necessary, since they add complexity to the system and
>> reduce flexibility with ordering. However, this may actually be a case
>> where it's both useful and worth the cost.
>
> It would certainly get rid of the need for naming the startup scripts like
> 000.foo.sh to force it to happen.
Where the client scripts are doing nothing but ldconfig'ing a set of
directories, a mechanism to obsolete those scripts altogether has already
been committed to HEAD. Florent is working on the code to support this in
bsd.port.mk, and we'll MFC after that's ready.
For other issues related to ordering, the proper REQUIRE, and when necessary
BEFORE lines _should_ be able to prevent the need for a pseudo-target, the
only question being when do we cross the point that doing it without a
pseudo-target is harder and "hurts" more than adding one.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060112153934.G51718>