From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jun 6 09:06:07 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA26642 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA26635 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:06:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id JAA21704; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 09:06:10 -0700 (PDT) To: Nate Williams cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Any objection to the following? In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 06 Jun 1997 10:01:31 MDT." <199706061601.KAA11774@rocky.mt.sri.com> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 1997 09:06:10 -0700 Message-ID: <21700.865613170@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > I thought the idea was to centralize as much as possible in > /etc/rc.conf. This seems to be a step backwards.... To an extent, yes. However it's still damn hard to edit, and I really see rc.conf's current format as more of a transitional thing anyway - we really should have something which is machine editable there in the long run, and perhaps once this occurs (along with tools to call from scripts for editing/adding new fields) then we should probably consider folding some of the multiple files in /etc back into "rc.conf", don't you think? Jordan