From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Nov 14 13:49:45 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7FC9106566C
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sat, 14 Nov 2009 13:49:45 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jilles@crab.stack.nl)
Received: from crab.stack.nl (crab.stack.nl [131.155.140.134])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 934A18FC16
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sat, 14 Nov 2009 13:49:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by crab.stack.nl (Postfix, from userid 1677)
	id 22EAD5C53; Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:30:51 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:30:51 +0100
From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20091114133051.GB35115@stack.nl>
References: <4AFBCBFE.6090504@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4AFBCBFE.6090504@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Subject: Re: Is there any reason to keep sysutils/rc_subr?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 13:49:45 -0000

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:49:02AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> I'm wondering if there is any reason to keep sysutils/rc_subr around?
> In bsd.port.mk the default sub for %%RC_SUBR%% is already
> /etc/rc.subr, and all supported platforms have always had that file.

> After the release of 8.0 I'd like to do the following:
> 1. Deprecate sysutils/rc_subr
> 2. Update all ports rc.d scripts that currently use %%RC_SUBR%% to use
> /etc/rc.subr instead.
> 3. Simplify any ports Makefiles that depend on sysutils/rc_subr
> 4. Simplify bsd.port.mk

> I also think it would be reasonable to update the Handbook section on
> ports rc.d scripts to use /etc/rc.subr now.

> Any objections?

A separate rc_subr port may be useful in case new functions are added to
rc.subr, and it is desired to use these functions on systems that do not
have them in /etc/rc.subr.

-- 
Jilles Tjoelker