From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Sep 26 09:03:15 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id JAA10279 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:03:15 -0700 Received: from phoenix.volant.org (root@phoenix.volant.org [205.179.79.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id JAA10274 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:03:07 -0700 From: patl@asimov.volant.org Received: from asimov.volant.org (asimov.volant.org [205.179.79.65]) by phoenix.volant.org (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA08632; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:02:00 -0700 Received: by asimov.volant.org (5.x/SMI-SVR4) id AA00766; Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:07:38 -0700 Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:07:38 -0700 Message-Id: <9509261607.AA00766@asimov.volant.org> To: kelly@fsl.noaa.gov Subject: Re: ports startup scripts Cc: gryphon@healer.com, jmb@kryten.atinc.com, peter@taronga.com, hackers@freebsd.org X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk |> Pat> Bzzzzttttt. Wrong. The sequence number can be static - |> Pat> built in when the package was built. It is the same for all |> Pat> systems. |> |> And thereby requiring anyone who's built a package to register with |> the czar of sequence numbers to prevent conflicts? I don't like it: |> If I were a commercial software developer considering doing a FreeBSD |> port of some tool or other, having to do this is one additional |> step is one additional headache I'd rather not have. No, there are -NO- numbering conflicts. Because the filenames are of the form [SK][0-9][0-9]mumble, where 'mumble' is the name of the service. Id doesn't matter if S87httpd and S87gopherd have the same sequence number, because it doesn't matter which of them is started first. -Pat