From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Sep 28 07:27:09 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id HAA15273 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 28 Sep 1995 07:27:09 -0700 Received: from healer.com (healer-gw.Empire.Net [205.164.80.204]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id HAA15268 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 1995 07:27:01 -0700 Received: (from gryphon@localhost) by healer.com (8.6.11/8.6.9.1) id KAA24354; Thu, 28 Sep 1995 10:31:31 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 10:31:31 -0400 From: Coranth Gryphon Message-Id: <199509281431.KAA24354@healer.com> To: hackers@freebsd.org, peter@taronga.com Subject: Re: ports startup scripts Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) > One possibility is to abstract the dependencies in the makefile, so that you > have your package set up like so (I say, use command syntax to make Definately abstract as much as possible. For example, almost all of the standard unix sub-systems (nfs-client, nfs-server, mount-remote, mount-local, mail-agent, name-service, routes, ...) can be abstracted. > config > depends-on smtp-server nfs-client > satisfies sql-server > name oracle > > This also allows the config tool to do a static dependency analysis and > tell you "snmp-manager requires snmp-service, aborting". This is an interesting concept. A little more work, but you verify at config time (rather than boot time) if it is a valid dependency chain. I don't know how much outside of standard services could really be abstracted though - except in the case if interdependent packages, which could come up with abstractions names within that group. Which is most of what you need to worry about anyway... I like it. -coranth ------------------------------------------+------------------------+ Coranth Gryphon | "Faith Manages." | | - Satai Delenn | Phone: 603-598-3440 Fax: 603-598-3430 +------------------------+ USMail: 3 Hansom Drive, Merrimack, NH 03054 Disclaimer: All these words are yours, except Europa...