From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jan 12 10:51:50 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id KAA10769 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 10:51:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id KAA10763 for ; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 10:51:47 -0800 (PST) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id LAA25821; Sun, 12 Jan 1997 11:38:03 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199701121838.LAA25821@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: DEVFS permissions &c. To: davidn@unique.usn.blaze.net.au (David Nugent) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 11:38:03 -0700 (MST) Cc: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "David Nugent" at Jan 12, 97 00:38:53 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > What are the current ideas of a SysV init? :-) > > Shoot first and ask questions later? :-) > > Seriously, I've used sysv for many years, and grew to quickly despise > the sysv approach. It does have some good sides, but, for example, > Sun's tree of symlinks to init/shutdown scripts is definitely an > overkill. This really depends on whether you expect to install third party commercial software, or not, doesn't it? Third party commercial software needs an interface for inserting tasks into the startup/shutdown mechanism such that it's possible for the tasks to be added/removed without post-processing rc files, since if only one vendor out of 200 vendors screws this up, your system is screwed entirely. It doesn't hurt that the mechanism shoul;d also guarantee ordering for what has been traditionally called "layered software products". Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.