Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 21:36:09 +0000 From: Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net> To: Pietro Cerutti <pietro.cerutti@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PR 105568 Message-ID: <20061115213609.GM52929@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <e572718c0611151325y28f0b64cy6eb052f55214550d@mail.gmail.com> References: <e572718c0611151143x434dbf4cjc867ef630c2c989@mail.gmail.com> <20061115203121.GL52929@submonkey.net> <e572718c0611151325y28f0b64cy6eb052f55214550d@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --]
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 10:25:36PM +0100, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
> On 11/15/06, Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net> wrote:
> >
> >I haven't looked at the patch yet, but this needs to default to "no"
> >rather than "yes". That kind of makes it a no-op, doesn't it?
>
> This is kind of debatable...
> I think that - since you can change the default answer on a per-daemon
> basis - the global default answer shouldn't be an issue...
You'll probably find that it isn't debatable. If adding this patch as
is results in boot-time prompting for every single foo_enable option in
rc.conf then it won't get committed. If I've misunderstood what the
default does, please say so.
Ceri
--
That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all.
-- Moliere
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFFW4hJocfcwTS3JF8RAv28AJ9NjAk3ozrKXepCytBbfoUd5UJcpgCfeomO
IFDw8PvJGsZuckThjcgc3uQ=
=K3iL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061115213609.GM52929>