From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Sep 26 05:51:46 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id FAA02859
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 05:51:46 -0700
Received: from UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU (root@UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU [129.7.1.11])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id FAA02854
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 05:51:43 -0700
Received: from Taronga.COM by UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU with UUCP id AA22545
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for hackers@FreeBSD.ORG); Tue, 26 Sep 1995 07:43:08 -0500
Received: (from peter@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id HAA08257 for hackers@FreeBSD.ORG; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 07:32:54 -0500
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Message-Id: <199509261232.HAA08257@bonkers.taronga.com>
Subject: Re: ports startup scripts
To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 07:32:53 -0500 (CDT)
In-Reply-To: <199509260751.DAA16119@healer.com> from "Coranth Gryphon" at Sep 26, 95 03:51:52 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 478       
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

> Granted. We have ease of adding something vs. complexity of the overall
> structure.

Complexity of the overall structure is identical in both cases. You have a
directory containing files and an ordered execution list for those files.

> Would you consider it easy to fix if they renumbered all the scripts in
> the rc3.d directory?

That's a lot less likely than moving things around in a file, since it's
easier to do. It's almost impossible to accidentally renumber files.