Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 10:56:30 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, kitsune <v.velox@vvelox.net>, garga@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/mail/qmail Makefile pkg-plist ports/mail/qmail/files rcNG Message-ID: <46AE264E.10909@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20070730133810.GA82221@bluepex.com> References: <200707281350.l6SDoI77002725@repoman.freebsd.org> <46AB669E.4000803@FreeBSD.org> <20070730133810.GA82221@bluepex.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Renato Botelho wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2007 at 08:54:06AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> Renato Botelho wrote:
>>> garga 2007-07-28 13:50:18 UTC
>>>
>>> FreeBSD ports repository
>>>
>>> Modified files:
>>> mail/qmail Makefile pkg-plist
>>> Added files:
>>> mail/qmail/files rcNG
>>> Log:
>>> - Add a rcNG startup script to ${PREFIX}/boot
>>>
>>> PR: ports/110109 http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=110109
>>> Submitted by: kitsune <v.velox@vvelox.net>
>>>
>>> Revision Changes Path
>>> 1.122 +3 -0 ports/mail/qmail/Makefile
>>> 1.1 +83 -0 ports/mail/qmail/files/rcNG (new)
>>> 1.15 +2 -1 ports/mail/qmail/pkg-plist
>>>
>>> http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/mail/qmail/Makefile.diff?&r1=1.121&r2=1.122&f=h
>>> http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/mail/qmail/files/rcNG
>>> http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/mail/qmail/pkg-plist.diff?&r1=1.14&r2=1.15&f=h
>> Can I ask why this was done in such a non-standard way? I have a
>> number of concerns, but maybe if you explain what's being done some of
>> them will be relieved. :)
>
> qmail and qmail related ports are non-standard on lot of things.
Ok, then what I'm saying is that I don't think they should be
non-standard on _this_ thing. If there are no existing examples of
this kind of script for qmail stuff then I would like to see this one
migrated to a proper rc.d format, and installed with USE_RC_SUBR.
> I added this non-standard rcNG script as an example,
To start with, we don't refer to it as rcNG, and (with all due respect
to the author) it's a bad example. Please take a look at
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/rc-scripts.html
to get a better idea of what such a script should look like.
> it doesn't touch etc/rc.d and so i was not worried with it.
I'm afraid I don't understand what this means. The script I looked at
was clearly designed to use the rc.d system, whether it lives in
LOCALBASE or not.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46AE264E.10909>